Supreme Court Permits Withdrawal of SLP
The Supreme Court on July 2, 2026, allowed the petitioners to withdraw their Special Leave Petition (Civil) Diary No. 37696 of 2026, which challenged a Bombay High Court order concerning the removal of a Chhatrapati Shivaji Maharaj statue on land owned by the Mormugao Port Authority. The Bench also granted them liberty to seek appropriate relief before the High Court. The decision has brought renewed attention to the Supreme Court Shivaji statue Mormugao Port Authority dispute.
A Bench comprising Justice M.M. Sundresh and Justice Sheel Nagu accepted the petitioners’ request to withdraw the matter. The Court also allowed them to file an appropriate application before the Bombay High Court at Goa seeking variation of the impugned order.
Challenge to Bombay High Court’s Order
The Special Leave Petition challenged the Bombay High Court’s final judgment dated April 7, 2026, in Writ Petition No. 511 of 2026.
Rajendra Laxman Parab and Others filed the petition against the Mormugao Port Authority and Others. Along with the SLP, the petitioners also filed applications seeking permission to file the petition, intervention or impleadment, and permission to place additional documents and facts on record.
Appearance of Counsel
Mr. Ninad Laud represented the petitioners. Mr. Dcosta Ivo Manuel Simon, Advocate-on-Record, instructed him.
Mr. Ujjwal Singh, Advocate-on-Record, appeared for the respondents with the assistance of Ms. Manisha Gupta.
Petitioners Withdraw the SLP
During the hearing, counsel for the petitioners informed the Bench that they wished to withdraw the Special Leave Petition.
The Bench accepted the request without examining the merits of the case. Instead, it simply recorded the withdrawal request and the liberty sought by the petitioners.
The order stated:
“Learned counsel appearing for the petitioners seeks to withdraw the present Special Leave Petition. Permission is granted.”
Liberty to Approach the High Court
After permitting the withdrawal, the Supreme Court granted the petitioners liberty to approach the Bombay High Court at Goa. They may now file an appropriate application seeking variation of the impugned order.
The Court further observed:
“The Special Leave Petition is, accordingly, dismissed as withdrawn with liberty to file an appropriate application before the High Court and seek variance of the impugned order.”
Supreme Court Does Not Examine the Merits
The Supreme Court limited its order to the procedural request for withdrawal. It did not decide the legality of the Bombay High Court’s directions regarding the Chhatrapati Shivaji Maharaj statue on land owned by the Mormugao Port Authority.
The Bench also chose not to exercise its discretionary jurisdiction under Article 136 of the Constitution. As a result, it made no observations that could affect future proceedings before the High Court.
Petitioners Can Seek Variation Before the High Court
The order preserves the petitioners’ right to seek modification of the Bombay High Court’s earlier directions. They can now present their arguments before the High Court through an application for variation.
This approach allows the High Court to reconsider its earlier order independently and in accordance with law.
Supreme Court Leaves All Issues Open
The Supreme Court neither upheld nor set aside the Bombay High Court’s judgment. Instead, it left every issue open for future consideration before the High Court.
The Supreme Court Shivaji statue Mormugao Port Authority matter will now continue before the Bombay High Court, where the petitioners may seek appropriate relief through a fresh application.
