Esha Bhattacharjee v Managing Committee of Raghunathpur Nafar Academy, (2013) 12 SCC 649. One of the factors taken note of therein was that substantial justice is paramount8. 37. In N L Abhyankar v Union of India, (1995) 1 MhLJ 503, a Division Bench of the Bombay High Court at Nagpur considered, though in the context of delay vis-à-vis Article 226 of the Constitution, the decision in M/s Dehri Rohtas Light Railway Company Limited v District Board, Bhojpur, (1992) 2 SCC 598, and held that “The real test for sound exercise of discretion by the High Court in this regard is not the physical running of time as such, but the test is whether by reason of delay there is such negligence on the part of the petitioner, so as to infer 8 Para 21.3 of Esha Bhattacharjee (supra).28 that he has given up his claim or whether before the petitioner has moved the Writ Court, the rights of the third parties have come into being which should not be allowed to be disturbed unless there is reasonable