Bombay High Court
VAISHALI SATISH KOLTEversusTHE SUB DIVISIONAL OFFICER MAGISTRATE BHOKARDAN AND OTHERS
- Disposal
- DISPOSED OFF
Holding
The Court allowed the civil application and ordered the deletion of Respondent No.15, thereby disposing of the application.
Summary
The petitioner, Vaishali Satish Kolke, filed a civil application seeking recall of a July 3, 2026 order that required the petitioners to take steps within four weeks or face dismissal. The petitioner argued that Respondent No.15, a formal party, was unnecessary for adjudicating the writ petition and should be deleted. The respondent’s counsel opposed the deletion. The Court examined whether the procedural order could be set aside and whether a formal party could be removed when not essential to the case. Finding merit in the petitioner’s claim, the Court allowed the civil application, ordered the deletion of Respondent No.15, and disposed of the application.
Issues considered
- Whether the order directing steps within four weeks can be recalled
- Whether Respondent No.15 can be deleted as a formal party not necessary for adjudication
Subjects
- recall of order
- civil application
- deletion of party
- procedural compliance
- dismissal
Judgment
2026:BHC-AUG:40277
1 974-CA-9224-2026.odt
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
BENCH AT AURANGABAD
974 CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 9224 OF 2026
IN WP/5676/2026
Vaishali Satish Kolte
VERSUS
The Sub Divisional Officer Magistrate Bhokardan And Others
...
Mr. Vaidya Ameet Raveendra for the Applicant.
Ms. Meenakshi Sangit, AGP for the Respondent/State.
...
CORAM : MANJUSHA DESHPANDE, J.
DATE : 01.09.2026
PER COURT :
1. The Application is for recall of order passed by this Court
dated 3rd July, 2026. It is stated that the order has been passed by this
Court directing that the steps shall be taken within a period of four weeks
by the respective Petitioners, failing which, the matter shall stand
dismissed without further reference to the Court.
2. The learned Advocate for the Applicant submits that the
Applicant has failed to take steps against the Respondent No.15,
therefore, the order impugned came to be passed. According to him,
Respondent No.15 is a formal party, not necessary for adjudication of the
Writ Petition. Hence, he seeks deletion of Respondent No.15.
3. In view of the averments made in the application, the Civil
Application is allowed in terms of Prayer Clauses [B] and [C].
Sunny Thote
2 974-CA-9224-2026.odt
4. Accordingly, the Civil Application is disposed off.
[ MANJUSHA DESHPANDE, J. ]
Sunny Thote
Checking your session…