Bombay High Court

RAGHUNATH TANAJI DALVI AND ORS.versusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA THR. SECRETARY THE DEPT. OF RURAL AND WATER CONSERVATION DEPT. AND ORS.

Disposal: Disposed Off
Bench: MADHAV JAMDAR PRAVIN SHESHRAO PATIL

Holding

The Court held that the order dated 18 March 2026 could be corrected to reflect the intended wording without affecting the substantive rights of the parties.

Summary

The petitioners, Raghunath Tanaji Dalvi and others, filed a writ petition before the Bombay High Court seeking correction of a prior order dated 18 March 2026. They requested that specific wording in paragraph 3 be altered: the phrase “to get revise their pension” was to be changed to “to get benefits of additional increment in salary”, and the word “revised” to be replaced by “given”. The respondents, the State of Maharashtra, opposed the amendment. The Court examined whether a judicial order could be rectified for typographical or clerical errors without altering its substantive effect. Finding that the requested changes were purely corrective and did not affect the substantive rights of the parties, the Court ordered the correction of the order and directed that the corrected version be uploaded on the website. The petition was thereby disposed.

Issues considered

Whether the Court may correct a previously issued order for clerical or typographical errors without altering its substantive content

Subjects

order correction
writ petition
civil appellate jurisdiction
clerical error
judicial rectification

Judgment

                                                                                 903-802-2026-CWP=.doc



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

                                            WRIT PETITION NO. 802 OF 2026

                     Raghunath Tanaji Dalvi & Ors.                             … Petitioners
                                      Versus
                     The State of Maharashtra & Ors.                           … Respondents
        Digitally
        signed by                                    ………….
        UDAY
UDAY    SHIVAJI      Mr. Eshan Nayak h/f Datta Pawar for the Petitioners.
SHIVAJI JAGTAP
JAGTAP Date:
        2026.04.08
                     Ms. Tejas J. Kapre, AGP for the Respondent - State.
        10:33:59
        +0530                                        ………….

                                                         CORAM :     MADHAV J. JAMDAR &
                                                                     PRAVIN S. PATIL, JJ.

                                                         DATE      : 7th APRIL, 2026.
                     P. C. :

                     1.        The matter is moved for speaking to the minutes of order dated

                     18th March 2026.

                     2.        In paragraph No.3, 2nd and 3rd lines, the words “to get revise their

                     pension” be substituted with “to get benefits of additional increment in

                     salary” and in second sentence, the word “revised” be substituted with

                     “given”.

                     3.        Accordingly, order dated 18th March 2026 be corrected and

                     corrected order be uploaded on the website.



                          [PRAVIN S. PATIL, J. ]                    [MADHAV J. JAMDAR, J.]



                     Uday S. Jagtap                       1 of 1

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…