Bombay High Court

SUDHARANI DATTATRAY SAMBHALEversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA THROUGH ITS MINISTER AND OTHERS

Disposal: DISPOSED OFF

Holding

The court allowed the restoration of the dismissed writ petition, condoning the delay in filing the application.

Summary

The petitioner, Sudharani Dattatray Sambhale, had her writ petition (WP/11794/2024) dismissed for want of prosecution. She filed a civil application (No. 13276 of 2025) seeking restoration of the dismissed petition, explaining the reasons for the failure to prosecute. The respondent state argued, but the applicant’s counsel asserted there was no willful default and requested condonation of the 12‑day delay in filing the application. The court examined whether the delay could be condoned and the petition restored despite the earlier dismissal. Finding no deliberate neglect, the court condoned the delay, allowed the application, and restored the writ petition, directing it to be listed for hearing on 23‑09‑2026. The parties were put on notice that the petition may be heard for final disposal if time permits.

Issues considered

Whether a writ petition dismissed for want of prosecution can be restored despite a delay in filing the restoration application.
Whether the court may condone the delay in filing the application for restoration.

Subjects

writ petition
restoration
condonation of delay
civil procedure
high court
prosecution of petition

Judgment

                                                         12-ca.13276.2025.odt


         IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                    BENCH AT AURANGABAD

                 CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 13276 OF 2025
                           IN WP/11794/2024

                    Sudharani Dattatray Sambhale
                              VERSUS
       The State Of Maharashtra Through Its Minister And Others

                                   ----
Ms.Bhagyashree S. Kamble, Advocate h/f. Mr.G.K.Sontakke                 and
Mrs.P.G.Sontakke, Advocates for applicant
Mr.B.V.Virdhe, AGP for respondent nos.1 to 4
Mr.Sujeet Karlekar, advocate for respondent no.5
                                   ----

                          CORAM :       AJIT B. KADETHANKAR, J.
                          DATE  :       AUGUST 29, 2026

ORDER :-

            Writ Petition No.11794 of 2024 was dismissed for want of

prosecution vide order dated 22.09.2025 passed by this court, on

account of the petitioner’s failure to prosecute the Writ Petition. This

Civil Application is filed seeking restoration of the Writ Petition.    The

reasons for failure to prosecute the Writ Petition are described in

paragraphs 3 to 5 of the application.



2.          Learned advocate for the applicant submits that there is no

willful default or deliberate attempt to avoid hearing in the petition. It

is submitted that if the petition is restored, the petitioner shall
                                      2                       12-ca.13276.2025



promptly    attend   and   prosecute      the   same   without    seeking

adjournment. It is submitted that there is delay of 12 days in filing

the present application which may be condoned.



3.          For the reasons stated in the application, the same is

allowed. The delay caused in filing the application stands condoned.

The Writ Petition is restored to file. It be listed on 23.09.2026.



4.          Parties are put to notice that if the time permits the

petition may be heard for final disposal.




                                  [AJIT B. KADETHANKAR, J.]
                                ………..


KBP

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…