Disposed¶8

Sabila Khatoon Wd/O Mohd Hira Mohd. Zahirul Shaikh v. the State of Maharashtra and 4 Others

Bombay HC8 Sept 2025WP/1570/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Bombay HC common order, 18-11-2025 (Ghuge & Bhobe, JJ.): batch listing order for matters on board serial nos. 3-235; office objections within two weeks; earlier interim/ad-interim orders continue; replies/rejoinders one week before next date; spare copies within 14 days else dismissal against unserved respondents on 15th day, notice returnable after four weeks if supplied; listing dates 01/12/2025-02/02/2026; Sr. 235 for final hearing 02/02/2026. No statutes, cases or quantum.

What did the court decide?

No substantive adjudication; administrative listing order continuing any earlier ad-interim/interim orders subject to removal of office objections within two weeks, and fixing staggered listing dates (01/12/2025 to 02/02/2026) for the batch. ¶8

Sabila Khatoon Wd/O Mohd Hira Mohd. Zahirul Shaikh vs the State of Maharashtra and 4 Others — Bombay HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

¶1

Digitally signed by ARUNA ARUNA SANDEEP SANDEEP TALWALKAR TALWALKAR Date: 2025.11.20 19:03:51 +0530 .. 1 .. common order

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION/ CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

¶3

CORAM : RAVINDRA V. GHUGE & ASHWIN D. BHOBE, JJ.

¶4

DATE : 18^th NOVEMBER, 2025.

¶5

P.C. :-

¶6

At the time of rising at 6.15 P.M., the matters mentioned in the chart in paragraph No. 7 hereunder, could not be taken up for hearing due to paucity of time.

¶7

In several of these matters, there are office objections. As such, all office objections shall be removed within two weeks.

¶8

Subject to compliance of the above, ad-interim/ interim order, if any granted earlier, would continue.

¶9

The affidavit in reply/rejoinder, if any, shall also be filed at least one week before the next date.

¶10

Matters in which service of notice is awaited, put up after service.

¶11

Matters in which though notices were issued, the office could not process the notice due to non-supply of spare copies, the Petitioner shall supply spare copies for issuance of notice within 14 days, failing which, the matters in which copies are not supplied, would stand dismissed as against the unserved

¶12

Talwalkar

¶13

.. 2 .. common order

¶14

Respondents on the 15^th day. If copies are supplied, office to issue notice to the unserved Respondents, returnable after four weeks.

¶15

Subject to the above, list these matters as under:-

¶16

Serial Nos. of matters on the Board	To be listed on	To be listed in the category
3 to 23 (Except Sr. No. 6)	01/12/2025	Fresh Admission
24 to 56	02/12/2025	Fresh Admission
58 to 78	03/12/2025	Fresh Admission
79 to 96	04/12/2025	Fresh Admission
98 to 99	04/12/2025	Fresh Admission
100 to 120 (Except Sr. No. 118)	05/12/2025	Fresh Admission
121 to 142	08/12/2025	Fresh Admission
144	09/12/2025	Admission
145 to 146	09/12/2025	Urgent Admission
147 to 153	09/12/2025	Urgent Order
154	28/01/2026	For Order
155 to 177	28/01/2026	Due Admission
179 to 201	29/01/2026	Due Admission
203 to 219 (Except Sr. No. 218)	30/01/2026	Due Admission
222 to 234	02/02/2026	Due Admission
235	02/02/2026	For final hearing

¶17

(ASHWIN D. BHOBE, J.)

¶18

(RAVINDRA V. GHUGE, J. )

¶19

Talwalkar

Sabila Khatoon Wd/O Mohd Hira Mohd. Zahirul Shaikh v. the State of Maharashtra and 4 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sabila Khatoon Wd/O Mohd Hira Mohd. Zahirul Shaikh v. the State of Maharashtra and 4 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Procedural history

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Sanjeev Suvarna vs Municipal Corporation of Greater Mumbai

Nemi Krishna Cooperative Housing Society vs the Municipalcorporation for Greater Mumbai through Its Legal Department

Aditi Anil Gaikwad vs State of Maharashtra through Its Secretary and Ors.

Vedanti Nitin Sabale vs State of Maharashtra Thr Sec. Tribal Dev. Dept. and Ors.

Bluestone Properties Private Limited vs the Chief Engineer (Development Plan)

Glenda Ignatius Dsilva vs State of Maharashtra through Government Pleader