1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY, AURANGABAD BENCH, AURANGABAD CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 11320 OF 2009 IN WRIT PETITION NO. 269 OF 2007 Smt. Meerabai Tulshiram Nerpagar ...Applicant VERSUS Smt. Sisnilabi Mangeshrao Sonde & ors. ...Respondents ..... Shri Parag Barde, advocate holding for Shri P.S.Shendurnikar, advocate for the applicant ..... CORAM : SHRIHARI P.DAVARE, J. DATED : 27th November, 2009 PER COURT : 1 Perused. Heard learned counsel for the applicant. 2 Learned counsel for the applicant has preferred the present Civil Application for restoration of Writ Petition No. 269 of 2007, which came to be dismissed on 3.10.2007 for non- compliance of the court’s order. 3 Learned counsel for the applicant submits that originally the applicant had filed Appeal from Order challenging 2 the order dated 4.10.2005, passed by learned III Adhoc Additional District Judge, Dhule in Civil Appeal No. 32 of 2005. However, subsequently the said Appeal from Order was converted into Writ Petition with the leave of the court, but office raised certain objection in the said Writ Petition. Thereafter this court (Coram : Naresh H. Patil, J.) passed conditional order on 3.9.2007 and granted four weeks time to remove the office objection raised by the office. However, said office objection could not be removed by the applicant within the prescribed time inadvertently and in view of the said conditional order, Writ Petition stood dismissed on 3.10.2007. 4 The applicant submits that she is ready and willing to remove the office objection immediately, if said Writ Petition is restored to its original position. Moreover, learned counsel further submitted that the applicant has preferred the present application on 29.10.2007 i.e. within period of limitation of 30 days from the date of dismissal on 3.10.2007. 5 Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and also considering the valuable rights of the applicant involved in the petition and further considering the position that the 3 present application has been preferred by the applicant within period of limitation i.e. on 29.10.2007 from the date of dismissal of Writ Petition No. 269 of 2007 on 3.10.2007, the present application is required to be allowed. 6 Besides that, the applicant has submitted that the conditional order dated 3.9.2007 to comply the office objection within a period of four weeks could not be complied with by the applicant till 3.10.2007 inadvertently, and therefore, Writ Petition came to be dismissed automatically on 3.10.2007 due to non- compliance of the said conditional order and considering the said position, present application is required to be allowed in the interest of justice. Moreover, notices have not been issued to the respondents and, therefore, present application is being considered without issuing notices to the respondents. 7 In the result, present application is allowed in terms of prayer clause ‘B’ thereof and Writ Petition No. 269 of 2007 stands restored to its original position and applicant/original petitioner to remove office objection within a period of one week. Civil Application stands disposed of accordingly. (SHRIHARI P. DAVARE, J.) 4 bm/ca11320.09