Bombay High Court
PARAJI MAROTI JABDE AND OTHERSversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND OTHERS
- Disposal
- DISPOSED OFF
Holding
The petition is dismissed for want of prosecution.
Summary
The petitioners filed a writ petition but failed to file a rejoinder or any subsequent affidavit despite multiple orders granting time. The petitioners' counsel repeatedly sought extensions, and the court granted last chances, yet the petitioners did not appear. The court observed that the petitioners showed no interest in prosecuting the case. Consequently, the court dismissed the petition for want of prosecution. The dismissal was entered without any substantive consideration of the merits.
Subjects
- writ petition
- dismissal
- want of prosecution
- civil procedure
- court orders
Judgment
2026:BHC-AUG:38986-DB
(1) wp85.17
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
BENCH AT AURANGABAD
29 WRIT PETITION NO. 85 OF 2017
PARAJI MAROTI JABDE AND OTHERS
VERSUS
THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND OTHERS
None for the petitioners.
Mr. S.R. Yadav-Lonikar, AGP for the respondent-State.
Mr. S.B. Solanke, Advocate for respondent No.4.
CORAM : KISHORE C. SANT &
JITENDRA JAIN, JJ.
DATE : 27.08.2026
PC :-
01. By order dated 25.01.2017, this Court had issued notice to
the respondents. The respondents appeared and respondent No.4 filed
reply. On 07.10.2019 the petitioners sought time to file rejoinder.
However, no rejoinder is filed. By order dated 11.11.2019, it was
recorded that the rejoinder is still not filed. Thereafter, it is seen that the
petition was not appearing on Board for considerable time. On
17.06.2026, the petitioner’s advocate sought time to take instructions
from the petitioners as regards present status of the matter. Time was
granted till 01.07.2016. On 01.07.2026 none was present for the
petitioners. It was adjourned to 29.07.2026 by way of last chance for
dismissal. On 29.07.2026 learned Advocate for the petitioner sought
some time to place on record subsequent events by way of additional
(2) wp85.17
affidavit.
02. Inspite of these specific orders, neither rejoinder is filed nor
subsequent affidavit is filed. Today when the petition is called out, none
present for the petitioners. The conduct of the petitioners shows that in-
fact the petitioners are not interested in prosecuting this petition.
03. Considering the above, this Court has no option, but to
dismiss this petition for want of prosecution. This petition, therefore,
stands dismissed for want of prosecution.
[JITENDRA JAIN, J.] [KISHORE C. SANT, J.]
snk/2026/Aug26/wp85.17
Checking your session…