Pratap T. Talreja v. Union Of India And ORS.

FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET NO.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO. 368 OF 2007 Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearance, Court's orders or directions and Registrar's orders Court's or Judge's orders None present.

CORAM : H. M. BHOSALE REGISTRAR (JUDL-I) Date : 17/02/2023 The Hon'ble Court vide order dated 03/05/2007 is pleased to issue Rule. As per office note, the learned Advocate for the Petitioner has not supplied copies to serve notices upon the Respondents till date.

Here referece to provisions under Chapter XVII Rule 7 of the Bombay High Court Appellate Side Rules, 1960 may conveniently be made which provides that the Applicant or his Advocate shall supply typed copies of the application as prescribed in Rule 2 within fourteen days from the date of issue of rule. Sub-rule (iii) thereof further provides that when copies are not supplied within the time prescribed, the Registrar shall dismiss the application for failure to prosecute.

It is pertinent to note that petition is pending for more than 16 years, despite the same, copies are not supplied till date. The Petition is listed on the board of Registrar (Judicial-I) on 16/01/2023 and 01/02/2023.

On both the occasions, the Registrar (Judicial) has passed specific orders that the learned Advocate shall supply copies otherwise appropriate orders will be passed. However,

despite putting the learned Advocate on notice, and more than 11⁄2 months has lapsed, there is absolute non-compliance of the aforesaid directions given by the Court of Registrar.

In turn, it will be just and proper to adopt the procedure contemplated above to dismiss the Writ Petition.

In turn, Writ Petition No. 368/2007 is dismissed for want of supply of copies by virtue of the powers conferred upon the Registrar vide Chapter XVII Rule 7(iii) of the Bombay High Court Appellate Side Rules, 1960.

Sd/- Registrar (Judicial-I)