SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2026 Supreme(Online)(SC) 278

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
AHSANUDDIN AMANULLAH, R. MAHADEVAN, JJ
MANJUSHREE SANJAY TELANG – Appellant
Versus
CAMP EDUCATION SOCIETY & ORS. – Respondent
PETITION FOR SPECIAL LEAVE TO APPEAL (C) NO. 4543/2026



Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: Mr. Devadutt Kamat, Sr. Adv., Ms. Priyanka Telang, Adv., Mr. Oleander D Singh, Adv., Mr. Pratham Sadh, Adv., Mr. Shivam Tomar, Adv., Mr. Ashutosh Jha, AOR

The court emphasized that procedural dismissals should not impede justice, allowing reconsideration of the merits in the original application.

Headnote:The petitioner challenges the dismissal of her Writ Petition against a School Tribunal's decision on the grounds of delay. The Court finds merit in reviewing the case despite a procedural dismissal, restoring the original Writ Petition for a merits-based evaluation. The Special Leave Petition is thus disposed of as directed.

ORDER

Heard learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner.

2. The petitioner is aggrieved by the fact that the Writ Petition filed by her against the judgment dated 19.10.2007 passed by the learned School Tribunal, Pune in Appeal No.49 of 1992 was dismissed on the ground of delay and laches, which is incorrect. It was submitted that initially a common Writ Petition was filed being Writ Petition No.2759 of 2008 in which the cancellation of Caste Certificate of the father of the petitioner was also challenged and in the said Writ Petition one of the reliefs was also against the judgment dated 19.10.2007 passed by the learned School Tribunal, Pune in Appeal No.49 of 1992. However, the relief qua the petitioner was permitted to be withdrawn by order dated 10.07.2008. It was submitted that the same was done taking into confidence the Court that the petitioner would seek separate remedy as it was a different cause of action before an appropriate forum, including filing of a writ petition. However, he fairly admits that specific permission to maintain such proceedings has not been granted, but further submits that in the larger interest of justice, the Court may restore the other reliefs, which stood deleted, in the pending Writ Petition No. 2759 of 2008.

3. Having considered the matter, we find that the petitioner may have a case with regard to the merits of his case being considered by the Court. This is also indicated in the impugned order at paragraph no.11 where it is said that the petition was dismissed solely on the ground of delay without any comment on the merits. Accordingly, to balance the equities, we restore the original Writ Petition No. 2759 of 2008 in its entirety, meaning thereby that all the reliefs claimed for in the said writ petition will be gone into by the Court on merits.

4. The Special Leave Petition stands disposed of in the aforesaid terms.

5. Pending application(s), if any, shall stand disposed of.

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top