The Madhya Pradesh High Court allowed the restoration of a dismissed writ petition, emphasizing both accountability of counsel and environmental responsibility. The Court directed the petitioner, engaged in manufacturing disposable leaf plates and bowls, to plant 25 native saplings in the factory premises as a condition for restoration, highlighting the importance of proactive compliance and sustainability in business practices.
The matter pertains to Writ Petition, which had been dismissed for non-compliance with a peremptory order dated 24.02.2025. The petition had been listed twice previously, and sufficient time had been granted to cure the defects. However, due to lapses on the part of the counsel, the defects remained uncured, resulting in dismissal of the petition. The petitioner then filed a Miscellaneous Civil Case (MCC) seeking restoration of the writ petition.
The petitioner contended that the failure to cure defects was not on their part but due to the office of the counsel. They sought condonation of delay in filing the MCC and requested restoration of the writ petition to prevent undue hardship.
The Court noted that while litigants should not suffer for delays caused by counsel, accountability must be maintained. Verbatim, the Court stated, “Considering the aforesaid… Delay, if any, in filing the MCC is hereby condoned. As the petitioner is engaged in the business of manufacturing disposable plates and bowls made of leaves, the petitioner is directed to plant 25 saplings of native plants/trees in the factory premises and submit proof thereof before this Court.”
The Bench clarified that submission of proof regarding the plantation would be a precondition for restoration of the writ petition. Simultaneously, the petitioner must cure all defects as pointed out by the Registry, with the Court warning that “no further opportunity shall be granted to the petitioner to cure the defects.”
The Court allowed the MCC, condoning the delay, and ordered the writ petition to be restored upon submission of proof of plantation and compliance with registry defects. The Court directed that a copy of this order be placed in the record of Writ Petition.
Case Title: M/s APS Enterprises through proprietor Mohd. Saddam Mansuri vs. The State of Madhya Pradesh & Ors.
Case No.: Misc. Civil Case No. 2653 of 2025
Coram: Justice Vivek Rusia, Justice Binod Kumar Dwivedi
Advocate for Petitioner: Adv. Aditya Goyal
Advocate for Respondent: Adv. Sudeep Bhargava
Read Order @LatestLaws.com
Picture Source :
