Research › Search › Judgment

Bombay High Court · body

2017 DAILYLAW 3254 (BOM)

PARAJI MAROTI JABDE AND OTHERS v. THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND OTHERS

WP/85/2017 · 2026-08-27

body2017

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

( 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 2026:BHC-AUG:38986-DB ( 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