Disposed¶7

Atmaram Baburao Shendkar and Ors. v. the State of Maharashtra Thru. Udd and Ors.

Bombay HC26 Jun 2025WP/7963/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Bombay High Court common order dated 16-12-2025 (Ghuge & Bhobe, JJ.): batch of matters not heard for paucity of time; office objections to be removed within two weeks; ad-interim/interim orders continued subject to compliance; reply/rejoinder affidavits one week before next date; spare copies within 14 days failing which dismissal against unserved respondents on 15th day; relisting chart 23/12/2025 to 13/02/2026 (Urgent/Due/Fresh Admission, Prioritized, Disposal, Dismissal, Final Hearing). No parties, advocates, statutes or precedents named.

What did the court decide?

Continuation of ad-interim/interim orders, if any granted earlier, subject to compliance (including removal of office objections within two weeks); no merits disposal, matters deferred and relisted per the chart in paragraph 7. ¶7

Atmaram Baburao Shendkar and Ors. vs the State of Maharashtra Thru. Udd and Ors. — Bombay HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶7

Ratio / Principle

All office objections in the listed matters shall be removed within two weeks.

¶2

Key takeaways

Ad-interim/interim orders, if any granted earlier, would continue, subject to compliance with the above directions.ratio¶3
The affidavit in reply/rejoinder, if any, shall be filed at least one week before the next date.ratio¶4
Where notices could not be processed for want of spare copies, the petitioner shall supply spare copies within 14 days, failing which those matters would stand dismissed against the unserved respondents on the 15th day; if copies are supplied, notice is to be issued returnable after four weeks.ratio

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Common listing order of the High Court of Judicature at Bombay (Ordinary Original Civil Jurisdiction / Civil Appellate Jurisdiction), Coram: Ravindra V. Ghuge & Ashwin D. Bhobe, JJ., dated 16th December 2025. A batch of matters could not be taken up for hearing at the time of rising at 6.15 p.m. owing to paucity of time. The Court directed: (i) all office objections to be removed within two weeks; (ii) ad-interim/interim orders, if any granted earlier, to continue subject to compliance; (iii) affidavits in reply/rejoinder, if any, to be filed at least one week before the next date; (iv) matters awaiting service of notice to be put up after service; and (v) where notices could not be processed for non-supply of spare copies, petitioners to supply spare copies within 14 days, failing which such matters would stand dismissed against the unserved respondents on the 15th day, and upon supply of copies notice to issue returnable after four weeks. The matters are to be listed per the chart in paragraph 7 on dates ranging from 23/12/2025 to 13/02/2026 under heads such as Urgent Admission, Due Admission, Prioritized Cases, For Disposal, For Dismissal, For Fresh Admission, Final Hearing at Admission Stage and Final Hearing.

¶1

.. 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 : 16^th DECEMBER, 2025.

¶5

P.C. :-

¶6

SHARADA RANGNATH WAHULE

¶7

Digitally signed by SHARADA RANGNATH WAHULE Date: 2025.12.19 16:02:28 +0530

¶8

At the time of rising at 6.15 pm., the matters

¶9

mentioned in the chart in paragraph No.7 hereunder, could not be taken up for hearing due to paucity of time.

¶10

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

¶11

Subject to compliance of the above, ad-interim/

¶12

interim order, if any granted earlier, would continue.

¶13

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

¶14

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

¶15

Matters in which though notices were issued, the

¶16

SUB

¶17

.. 2 .. common order

¶18

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

¶19

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

¶20

Serial Nos. of matters on the Board	To be listed on	To be listed in the category
923 to 925	29/01/2026	Urgent Admission
930 to 933	29/01/2026	Due Admission
01	19/01/2026	At 3.00 pm
04 to 10	23/12/2025	Prioritized Cases
11 to 12	05/02/2026	For Disposal
13	05/02/2026	For Dismissal
14 to 40	06/02/2026	For Fresh Admission
41 to 60	09/02/2026	For Fresh Admission
62 to 97	10/02/2026	For Fresh Admission
100 to 104	11/02/2026	For Fresh Admission
106 to 112	12/02/2026	For Fresh Admission
114 to 118	13/02/2026	For Fresh Admission
119 to 120	13/02/2026	For Final hearing at Admission Stage

¶21

SUB

¶22

	.. 3 ..	common order
121 to 127	13/02/2026	For Urgent
		Admission
128	13/02/2026	For Final Hearing

¶23

(ASHWIN D. BHOBE, J.) (RAVINDRA V. GHUGE, J. )

¶24

SUB

Atmaram Baburao Shendkar and Ors. v. the State of Maharashtra Thru. Udd and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Atmaram Baburao Shendkar and Ors. v. the State of Maharashtra Thru. Udd and Ors.

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

Mehul Abhilash Jhaveri vs Hdfc Bank Ltd.

Abdul Rehman Suleman Shaikh and Anr. vs the State of Maharashtra Thru. R.D. and Ors.

M/S Ritu Developers vs Mira Bhayandar Municipal Corporation (through Its Commissioner)

Sayeed Ahmed Sindole, Trustee of the Upper Colaba Mohammedan Kadimi Cemetery Chawl and Mosque vs the Municipal Commissioner , Municipal Corporation of Greater Mumbai

Ambernath Sahakari Sammudaik Shetki Society Ltd. Throu. Vishwas v Mhaske vs the State of Maharashtra Throu. Govt Pleader and Ors.

Narayan Sahadu Kokane vs Sub Divisional Officer and Ors.