1. Application seeking restoration of writ restoration application dismissed for non-compliance with peremptory order directing removal of defects in special appeal. (Para 2 , 3 )
Back
Next 
2026 Supreme(Raj) 663
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN, BENCH AT JAIPUR
MAHENDAR KUMAR GOYAL, UMA SHANKER VYAS, JJ.
Mahesh Sharma, S/o. Late Shri Harish Chand Ji Sharma – Petitioner
Versus
State Of Rajasthan, Through Secretary, Department Of Revenue – Respondent
D.B. Civil Miscellaneous Application No. 44 of 2025 In D.B. Writ Restoration Application No.762 of 2024 In D.B. Special Appeal (Writ) No.128 of 2024 In S.B. Civil Misc. Application No.05 of 2022 In S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.10193 of 2015
Decided On : 12-02-2026
Advocates Appeared:
For the Petitioner: Mr. Prem Shanker Sharma with Mr. Jitendra Kumar Sharma
For the Respondent: Mr. R.K. Agarwal, Sr. Adv. assisted by Mr. Adhiraj Modi.
For the Petitioner: Mr. Prem Shanker Sharma with Mr. Jitendra Kumar Sharma
For the Respondent: Mr. R.K. Agarwal, Sr. Adv. assisted by Mr. Adhiraj Modi.
A court may recall a peremptory order revoking the restoration of an appeal if the removal of defects is impossible for the applicant to achieve without a court-granted waiver, ensuring the interest of justice is served.
Headnote:(A) Procedural Law - Restoration of Applications - Compliance with peremptory orders for removal of defects - Where defects are incurable by the party and require a waiver from the Court, the party cannot be penalized for non-compliance - It is in the interest of justice to recall an order of revocation when compliance is impossible on the part of the applicant. (Paras 3 and 5)
Facts of the case:
An application for restoration of a special appeal was allowed subject to the removal of office defects within a specified timeframe, with a condition that failure to do so would result in the restoration order being revoked. The applicant submitted that certain pointed-out defects were incurable by the applicant and required a waiver from the Court, rendering compliance with the peremptory order impossible.
Findings of Court:
The Court observed that the respondents did not dispute the fact that the specific defects could not be cured by the applicants. Therefore, the Court deemed it just and proper to allow the application for restoration.
Issues: Whether a peremptory order revoking the restoration of an appeal should be recalled if the required removal of defects is impossible for the applicant to fulfill without a court-granted waiver.
Ratio Decidendi: When a party is unable to comply with a court order to remove defects because such defects are incurable without the court's intervention or waiver, the court may recall the order of dismissal or revocation to serve the interest of justice.
Result: Civil miscellaneous application allowed; order recalled and restoration application restored to its original number.
Legal Category Hierarchy
Table of Contents
2. Applicants argued defects were incurable and required waiver; respondents opposed but could not dispute incurability of specific defects. (Para 3 , 4 )
3. Court found respondents could not dispute that defects 2 and 6 were incurable, making compliance with peremptory order impossible, warranting recall. (Para 4 , 5 )
4. Where compliance with peremptory restoration order is impossible due to incurable defects, restoration application may be restored and prior order recalled. (Para 3 , 5 )
5. Civil miscellaneous application allowed; order dated 26.11.2024 recalled and writ restoration application restored to original number. (Para 6 )
6. Can a restoration application be restored when defects are incurable and compliance with peremptory order is impossible?
Yes, if the defects are incurable and compliance is impossible, the court may recall the peremptory order and restore the restoration application to its original number in the interest of justice. (Para 3 , 5 , 6 )
JUDGMENT :
For the reasons stated in the DB Civil Miscellaneous Application No.280/2025 seeking condonation of delay in filing the DB Civil Miscellaneous Application No.44/2025, the same is allowed. The delay in filing the civil miscellaneous application is condoned.
2. This application is filed for restoration of the DB Writ Restoration Application No.762/2024 which stood dismissed on account of order dated 26.11.2024 passed by this Court in following terms:-
“1. This application is filed for restoration of D.B. Special Appeal (Writ) No.128/2024. The appeal was dismissed for non-compliance of the order dated 15.03.2024 passed by this Court and the order dated 31.05.2024 passed by the Registrar (Judicial).
2. For the reasons mentioned therein, the application is allowed and the special appeal (writ) be restored to its original number, subject to removal of defects within three weeks. In case of failure to do the needful, the restoration order passed today shall stand revoked without reference to the Court.”
3. Learned counsel for the applicants, inviting attention of this Court towards the defects No.2 and 6 pointed out by the Office in the DB Special Appeal (Writ) No.128/2024, would submit that the same are incurable on his behest rather, the same will require waiver by this Court. He submits that since, compliance of the peremptory order dated 26.11.2024 is impossible on his part, it is in the interest of justice that the order dated 26.11.2024 be recalled and the restoration application be restored to its original number.
4. Although, learned Senior Counsel for the respondents No.3 to 9 opposed the prayer but, could not dispute that the defects No.2 and 6 could not have been cured by the applicants.
5. In view thereof, we deem it just and proper to allow this civil miscellaneous application.
6. Accordingly, the civil miscellaneous application is allowed. The order dated 26.11.2024 is recalled and the DB Writ Restoration Application No.762/2024 is restored to its original number.
