Created by Fuzzy Cloud

Bombay High Court

GRAM PANCHAYAT USMANPUR THRUGH SARPANCHversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND OTHERS

Disposal
DISPOSED OFF

Holding

The writ petition is dismissed for want of prosecution due to the petitioner's failure to appear.

Summary

The Gram Panchayat Usmanpur filed writ petition No. 13303 of 2019 before the Bombay High Court, Aurangabad Bench, seeking relief against the State of Maharashtra and others. The petitioner failed to appear at the scheduled hearing on 06.01.2026, and despite the court’s adjournment to the afternoon session, no representation was made. The court again listed the matter for 08.01.2026, giving another opportunity, but the petitioner remained absent. On the subsequent date, the petitioner again did not appear. Consequently, the court dismissed the writ petition in default for want of prosecution, ordering dismissal under urgent orders.

Issues considered

  • What is the appropriate consequence when a petitioner fails to appear and prosecute a writ petition?

Subjects

  • writ petition
  • default dismissal
  • want of prosecution
  • procedural default
  • High Court
  • non-appearance

Judgment

2026:BHC-AUG:596
                                                  1                        910 WP 13303-2019.odt


                           IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                                      BENCH AT AURANGABAD

                                 910 WRIT PETITION NO. 13303 OF 2019

                      GRAM PANCHAYAT USMANPUR THROUGH SARPANCH
                                            VERSUS
                          THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND OTHERS
                                               …
             Ms. D.S. Jape – AGP for Respondent Nos.1 to 4, State
                                               …
                                  CORAM       : SIDDHESHWAR S. THOMBRE, J.
                                       DATE           : 08.01.2026

             PER COURT :
             1.       None appears for the petitioner.

             2.       On 06.01.2026, the following order was passed :

                    “1.     None appears for the petitioner.
                    2.      In fact, when this matter was called in the morning
                            session, none appeared on behalf of the petitioner.
                            Even on Court’s motion, when the matter was kept
                            back in the afternoon session to give one more
                            opportunity to the petitioner, none appeared on behalf
                            of the petitioner.
                    3.      List the petition on 08.01.2026, under the caption “For
                            Dismissal” in urgent orders category.”


             3.       Today also, none appears for the petitioner.

             4.       In view thereof, the Writ Petition stands dismissed in default for

             want of prosecution.


                                                         [ SIDDHESHWAR S. THOMBRE ]
                                                                   JUDGE
             Pooja Kale/


Continue reading with your account

Sign in to read the full judgment. It’s free.

Sign in to read

Checking your session…

For a signed copy suitable for filing, refer to the court's website.