Bombay High Court

SAGAR ZIMAJI DHEBEversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA THR. PRINCIPAL SECRETARY TRIBAL DEVELOPMENT DEPT. AND ORS.

Disposal: Disposed Off

Holding

The Court held that the typographical error stating 'weeks' instead of 'months' is correctable and ordered the amendment.

Summary

The petitioner, Sagar Zimaji Dhebe, filed a writ petition before the Bombay High Court seeking clarification on an order dated 29 September 2026. The order directed that similarly situated matters be remanded for fresh decision within six weeks, but the operative clause mistakenly recorded 'weeks' instead of the intended 'months'. The Court identified the discrepancy as a clerical error arising from inadvertence. It directed that the word 'weeks' be replaced with 'months' in clause (iv) of paragraph 3 of the order. The corrected order was to be uploaded, and the motion for speaking to minutes was disposed of. The decision underscores the Court's authority to amend its own orders to rectify typographical mistakes.

Issues considered

Whether a clerical error in the period specified in an operative clause of a court order can be corrected by the Court

Subjects

clerical error
court order correction
civil procedure
high court
writ petition

Judgment

                                                                  WP 4894 26.odt

              IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                       CIRCUIT BENCH AT KOLHAPUR
                      CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

                       WRIT PETITION NO. 4894 OF 2026

                             SAGAR ZIMAJI DHEBE
                                    VERSUS
                THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND OTHERS
                                       …
                 Advocate for Petitioner : Mr. Harsh Arun Khot
                  A.G.P. for Respondent/State : Mr. J. P. Patil

                       CORAM               :   SHAILESH P. BRAHME, J.

                       DATE                : 01.10.2026


PER COURT :

         Motion is made for speaking to minutes to the order dated
29.09.2026.

2.      All the similarly situated matters are remanded with direction to
decide them afresh within a period of six months, but it is wrongly recorded
as ‘six weeks’ in the operative clause (iv) of the third para. The mistake is
due to inadvertence.

3.      The word ‘weeks’ shall be replaced by ‘months’ as recorded in clause
(iv) of paragraph no. 3 of the order.

4.      Necessary correction be carried out and a fresh order be uploaded.

5.      Motion is disposed of.



                                        ( SHAILESH P. BRAHME, J.)



mkd/-

                                                                             1/1

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…