Bombay High Court

Shri Vasant Harishchandra Patil Through his legal representative Smt Dipti Vasant PatilversusThe State of Maharashtra Through its Secretary,Urban Development Department

Decided: 31 August 2026
Disposal: Disposed Off

Holding

The court allowed the interim application and restored the writ petition, setting aside the conditional order.

Summary

The applicant filed an interim application seeking restoration of Writ Petition (Stamp) No. 38742 of 2025, which had been rejected by a conditional order for failure to remove office objections within two weeks as required by the Bombay High Court Appellate Side Rules. The applicant claimed a communication gap between the advocate and the clerk caused the delay and expressed readiness to comply immediately. The court noted the default was on the advocate and held that the applicant should not suffer for it. Accordingly, the court set aside the conditional order, restored the writ petition, and condoned the delay in filing the interim application. The court directed the applicant to remove the office objections within three weeks, failing which the petition would be rejected again, and disposed of the interim application.

Issues considered

Whether the interim application for restoration of the writ petition should be allowed despite the delay and default in removing office objections
Whether the conditional order rejecting the writ petition can be set aside

Subjects

interim application
restoration of writ petition
office objections
procedural default
Bombay High Court Rules
civil appellate jurisdiction

Judgment

                                                                 1                    14-ia-3554-2026 in
                                                                                    wpst-38742-2025.doc

                                     IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                                             CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

                                        INTERIM APPLICATION NO. 3554 OF 2026
                                                         IN
                                         WRIT PETITION (ST) NO. 38742 OF 2025

                      Vasant Harishchandra Patil through
                      his LR Smt. Dipti Vasant Patil                              ...Applicant
                               Vs.
                      The State of Maharashtra through
                      its Secretary Urban Development
                      Department and Others                                        ...Respondents
                                                    -----------------

                      Ms. Poonam K. Pal i/b. Mr. Sachin K. Hande, for the Applicant.
                      Ms. Nisha M. Mehara, AGP, for Respondents / State.
                                                        -----------------
   MAMTA
   AMAR
   KALE
Digitally signed by
MAMTA AMAR KALE
Date: 2026.09.01
11:10:31 +0530
                                                       CORAM :          R. I. CHAGLA AND
                                                                        FIRDOSH P. POONIWALLA, JJ.

                                                       DATED         : 31th AUGUST, 2026

                      P.C.:-

                      1.             By this Interim Application, the Applicant / Original Petitioner

                      has sought for restoration of the Writ Petition (Stamp) No.38742 of 2025,

                      which came to be rejected by conditional Order dated 25 th February 2026

                      passed by Registrar (Judicial -I) for non removal of office objections, within

                      the stipulated period of two weeks, as per Rule 3 sub Rule (ii) of Chapter

                      XVII of the Bombay High Court Appellate Side Rules, 1960.



                       Mamta Kale                                                                   1/2
                                        2                     14-ia-3554-2026 in
                                                            wpst-38742-2025.doc

2.            The Applicant has stated that due to communication gap

between the Advocate and the Clerk, office objections could not be removed

within the stipulated period. The Applicant was under the impression that

the office objections had been removed as per the said conditional order.

3.            The Applicant has further stated that she is ready to comply

with the objections immediately.

4.            Considering the averments made in the Interim Application

and there being default on the part of Advocate for the Applicant in not

removing the office objections, the Applicant ought not be made to suffer

on account thereof.     We accordingly allow the Interim Application and

restore the Writ Petition to the file of this Court by setting aside the

conditional Order dated 25th February 2026 by which the Writ Petition came

to be rejected on account of non removal of office objections.

5.            The delay in filing of the Interim Application is accordingly

condoned.

6.            The office objections shall be removed by the Petitioner within

a period of three weeks from the date of uploading of this Order. Failure to

remove the office objections shall result in the Writ Petition once again

being rejected without reference to this Court.

7.            The Interim Application is accordingly disposed of.



     [FIRDOSH P. POONIWALLA, J.]                           [R.I. CHAGLA, J.]

 Mamta Kale                                                                 2/2

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…