10-IA-850-26 IN WPST.DOC IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION INTERIM APPLICATION NO. 850 OF 2026 IN WRIT PETITION (ST) NO.10787 OF 2023 Dr. K Sudhakar Reddy Applicant/ Petitioner Versus Peoples Education Society Thou Its Chairman Dr Bhalchandrra Mungekar Respondents _______ Mr. Shivraj Kunchge, for Applicant/Petitioner. Ms. Savita Ashok Prabhune, AGP for Respondent-State. Ms. Aarti R. Dharamasey, for Respondent Nos.1, 2,4 & 7. _______ CORAM: AARTI SATHE, J. DATE: 24 AUGUST 2026 P.C. 1. This Interim Application seeks condonation of delay of one year and 151 days. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the Applicant submits that, as stated in paragraph 1 of the Interim Application, the office objections could not be removed by the clerk of the Advocate due to certain communication issues, and consequently, on the last date fixed for removal of office objections, the Petition came to be dismissed. 2. It was only subsequently, when the matter did not appear on the Board, that the office of the Advocate checked the status of the matter and came to know that the Petition had been dismissed on 26 July 2024. It appears that there was an Mane JYOTI RAJESH MANE Digitally signed by JYOTI RAJESH MANE Date: 2026.08.25 11:13:26 +0530 10-IA-850-26 IN WPST.DOC inadvertent error on the part of the Advocate’s office in complying with the office objections. It is a settled position of law that a litigant should not ordinarily be made to suffer on account of an error or mistake on the part of the Advocate. 3. Ms. Dharamjey, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the Respondents vehemently opposes the application for condonation of delay on the ground that the Applicant has suppressed material facts and has failed to disclose the pendency of Writ Petition No. 6677 of 2023. It is further submitted that the reliefs sought in the present Petition itself cannot be granted to the Applicant and, therefore, condoning the delay in filing the Petition would serve no useful purpose. 4. Considering the submissions made on behalf of the Respondents that the prayers sought in the Petition itself may not survive, this Court is of the view that the matter can be appropriately disposed of only after the aforesaid issues are considered on merits. 5. Since these are issues which require detailed arguments and consideration, and having regard to the settled position that a litigant should not ordinarily suffer on account of inadvertence on the part of the Advocate, this Court is of the view that the delay deserves to be condoned. This view is also supported by the catena of judgments of the Hon’ble Supreme Court adopting a liberal approach while considering applications for condonation of delay. 6. Office objections shall be removed within a period of one week from today. In the event the office objections are not removed within the stipulated Mane 10-IA-850-26 IN WPST.DOC period, the Writ Petition shall stand dismissed without further reference to the Court. 7. Interim Application is allowed. 8. Stand over to 07 September 2026. (AARTI SATHE, J.) Mane