Dy Collector Rehabilitation Pune v. Vijay Namdeo Rakshe And ORS

Digitally signed by RUSHIKESH VISHNU PATIL Date:

2025.11.27 15:28:09 +0530 RUSHIKESH VISHNU PATIL 32 IA.10679.2025.doc

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION INTERIM APPLICATION NO. 10679 OF 2025 IN WRIT PETITION NO. 10636 OF 2019 Dy Collector (Rehabilitation) Pune ...

Applicant In the matter between:

Vijay Namdeo Rakshe & Anr.

...

Petitioners

Versus

The State of Maharashtra & Ors.

...

Respondents ****** Mr. B. V. Samant, Addl.G.P. a/w Ms A. A. Purav, AGP, for the ApplicantState. Mr. Mayuresh Lagu i/by Mr. Sagar Patil, for the Petitioners. ******

CORAM

: MANISH PITALE AND MANJUSHA DESHPANDE, JJ.

DATE : 25th NOVEMBER 2025 P.C. :

.

By this application, the applicant (original respondent No.4Deputy Collector (Rehabilitation) Pune) has prayed for recall of the order dated 2nd May 2024, whereby this Court had imposed cost of Rs.25,000/- for failure on the part of the applicant in filing reply affidavit, despite repeated orders passed by this Court. 2.

A perusal of the application shows that in paragraph 3 it is specifically pleaded by the applicant (original respondent No. 4) that he took charge as Deputy Collector (Rehabilitation), Pune, on 6th March 2024, and he was engaged in election duty for the general Rushikesh

32 IA.10679.2025.doc elections to Lok Sabha in the year 2024. The elections took place in May 2024, and it is stated that there was a heavy burden of election-related work, and due to the said reason, the affidavit in the writ petition could not be filed.

3.

We find that since the applicant took charge on 6th March 2024 and the contents of the application indicate that the concerned officer was indeed on election duty, that was indeed the reason why he could not promptly file the reply affidavit.

4.

Since sufficient grounds are made out showing that the said officer did not deliberately violate the directions issued by this Court, the order dated 2nd May 2024 can be recalled. 5.

Accordingly, the order dated 2nd May 2024 is recalled, only to the extent of imposing cost of Rs.25,000/- on the Respondent-State. 6.

It is made clear that the interim direction granted in favour of the petitioners in paragraph 6 of the said order shall continue to operate.

7.

The application stands disposed of in above terms. (MANJUSHA DESHPANDE, J.) (MANISH PITALE, J.) Rushikesh