Bombay High Court
TATOBA BALU BHISE AND OTHERSversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA THR. SECRETARY AND OTHERS
- Disposal
- Disposed Off
Holding
A judicial order containing a typographical error may be corrected on application to reflect the intended substantive relief.
Summary
The petitioners filed writ petitions seeking correction of a typographical error in the order dated 18‑03‑2026, which mistakenly stated that they were entitled to revise their pension. They contended that the correct intention was to grant them benefits of an additional salary increment. The Court examined the petition and found the claim of a typographical mistake to be credible. It held that such errors in judicial orders may be rectified on application without affecting the substantive rights of the parties. Accordingly, the Court ordered that the phrase “they are entitled to get revise their pension” be replaced with “to get benefits of additional increment in salary” and directed the corrected order to be uploaded.
Issues considered
- Whether the order dated 18‑03‑2026 contains a typographical mistake warranting correction
- Whether a court may amend its own order to rectify a typographical error
Subjects
- typographical error
- order correction
- writ petition
- pension
- salary increment
- judicial amendment
Judgment
910 to 913 WP 804, 805, 807
&1078.26.odt
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CIRCUIT BENCH AT KOLHAPUR
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
WRIT PETITION NO.804 OF 2026
Vinayak Babu Pradhan and others .. Petitioners
..Versus..
The State of Maharashtra and others .. Respondents
Digitally signed
by
ABHIMANYU
ABHIMANYU
SHANKARRAO
Mr. Datta H. Pawar, Advocate a/w Adv. Eshan Nayak, for Petitioners.
SHANKARRAO GULANDE
GULANDE Date: Mr. V.M. Mali, AGP for Respondent Nos.1 to 3-State.
2026.03.25
10:32:43
+0530
Mr. Kedar Lad, Advocate a/w Adv. Indrayani Patil, Poonam Dhotre for
Respondent Nos.4 and 5.
WRIT PETITION NO.805 OF 2026
Tatoba Balu Bhise and others .. Petitioners
..Versus..
The State of Maharashtra and others .. Respondents
Mr. Datta H. Pawar, Advocate a/w Adv. Eshan Nayak, for Petitioners.
Mr. S.B. Kalel, AGP for Respondent Nos.1 to 3-State.
Mr. R.P. Kadam, Advocate for Respondent Nos.4 and 5.
WRIT PETITION NO.807 OF 2026
Satappa Vishnu Patil and others .. Petitioners
..Versus..
The State of Maharashtra and others .. Respondents
Mr. Datta H. Pawar, Advocate a/w Adv. Eshan Nayak, for Petitioners.
Mr. A.A. Naik, AGP for Respondent-State.
Mr. Kedar Lad, Advocate a/w Adv. Indrayani Patil, Poonam Dhotre for
Respondent Nos.4 and 5.
WRIT PETITION NO.1078 OF 2026
Sachin Sursing Kharade and others .. Petitioners
..Versus..
The State of Maharashtra and others .. Respondents
Mr. Datta H. Pawar, Advocate a/w Adv. Eshan Nayak, for Petitioners.
Mr. V.M. Mali, AGP for Respondent Nos.1 to 3-State.
Mr. Kedar Lad, Advocate a/w Adv. Indrayani Patil, Poonam Dhotre for
Respondent Nos.4 and 5.
………..
CORAM : MADHAV J. JAMDAR AND
PRAVIN S. PATIL, JJ.
DATE : MARCH 24, 2026.
P.C.
1 of 2
910 to 913 WP 804, 805, 807
&1078.26.odt
1. The petitioners have moved the praecipe for speaking to
minutes and pointed out in para 3 that there is a typographical mistake in
the order dated 18.3.2026.
2. Considering the entire contention of the petitioners, it is clear
that there is a typographical mistake. Hence, in para 3 of the order, the
words “they are entitled to get revise their pension” be replaced as the
words “to get beneits of additional increment in salary”.
3. Accordingly, order dated 18.3.2026 be corrected accordingly
and correct order be uploaded.
(PRAVIN S. PATIL, J.) (MADHAV J. JAMDAR, J.)
Gulande
2 of 2
Checking your session…