Bombay High Court
Union Of Indiaversussavita kantaram gaikwad
- Decided
- Disposal
- Disposed Off
Holding
The Court condoned the delay, restored the writ petition, and thereafter permitted its withdrawal, disposing of it as withdrawn.
Summary
The Union of India filed a writ petition which was dismissed for default by the Registrar on 27 February 2026. The Union subsequently filed an interim application, 165 days later, seeking restoration of the dismissed petition, arguing that the delay was neither deliberate nor inordinate and citing Supreme Court precedents. The respondent opposed condonation of the delay. The Court, relying on the cited judgments, condoned the delay, restored the writ petition, and thereafter allowed the petitioner’s request to withdraw the petition because the Armed Forces Tribunal judgment had already been implemented. Consequently, the writ petition was disposed of as withdrawn.
Issues considered
- Whether a delay of 165 days in filing an application for restoration of a dismissed writ petition can be condoned.
- Whether the writ petition, once restored, may be withdrawn on the petitioner’s instructions.
Subjects
- restoration of writ petition
- condonation of delay
- default dismissal
- withdrawal of petition
- procedural law
Judgment
(909)-IA-6847-26.odt
PANCHAL
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
Digitally
signed by
BALAJI
BALAJI GOVINDRAO
GOVINDRAO PANCHAL
PANCHAL Date:
INTERIM APPLICATION NO. 6847 OF 2026
2026.09.03
11:06:05
+0530 IN
WRIT PETITION (STAMP) NO. 25439 OF 2025
Union of India ...Applicant
IN THE MATTER BETWEEN
Union of India ...Petitioner
Versus
Savita Kantaram Gaikwad ...Respondent
...
Ms. Khushi Dhamdhere i/by Ms. Anamika Malhotra, for the Applicant/
Petitioner.
Mr. Yogendra Pratap Singh (through V.C.), for the Respondent.
...
CORAM : RAVINDRA V. GHUGE, ACJ. &
GAUTAM A. ANKHAD, J.
DATE : 2nd SEPTEMBER, 2026.
P.C.:
1. By this Application, the Union of India prays for restoration of
the Writ Petition, which was dismissed for default by a conditional order
passed by the Registrar (Judicial-I) on 27th February, 2026. The delay caused
in filing this Application seeking restoration, is 165 days.
2. The learned Advocate for the Respondent submits that the
reasons in support of condonation of delay, are not satisfactory.
1
(909)-IA-6847-26.odt
3. The learned Advocate for the Petitioner relies upon the
judgments delivered by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Collector, Land
Acquisition, Anantnag vs. Mst. Katiji & Ors., (1987) 2 SCC 107 and Esha
Bhattacharjee vs. Managing Committee of Raghunathpur Nafar Academy &
Ors., (2013) 12 SCC 649. The delay of 165 days is neither deliberate nor
inordinate. Moreover, the Applicant/Petitioner submits that, if the Writ
Petition is restored, the Petitioner desires to withdraw the Petition because
the impugned judgment of the learned Armed Forces Tribunal has already
been implemented.
4. In view of the above, this Interim Application is allowed. Delay
is condoned. The Writ Petition stands restored at the stage, at which it was
dismissed.
ORDER ON THE WRIT PETITION
5. The learned Advocate for the Petitioner submits that since the
judgment of the learned Armed Forces Tribunal has been implemented, this
Petition may be permitted to be withdrawn, on instructions.
2
(909)-IA-6847-26.odt
6. In view of the above, the Writ Petition is disposed off as
withdrawn, on instructions.
[GAUTAM A. ANKHAD, J.] [ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE]
3
Checking your session…