KISHORI SINGH Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Would the unconditional withdrawal of a writ petition under Art.226 of the Constitution operate as a bar to the filing of a second petition on the same facts and in respect of the same cause of action is the somewhat significant question which arises at the threshold in this appeal under Cl.10 of the Letters Patent.

(2.) Because of the pristinely legal nature "of the question aforesaid and the view I am inclined to take thereon, it seems wholly unnecessary to recount the facts in any great detail. Suffices it to mention that the issue arises from a somewhat insignificant dispute about the transfer of the appellant and the contending claims to officiate on the post of a Headmaster between him and the contesting respondent. It seems to be common ground that earlier the appellant had preferred Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No. 4505 of 1982 in the High Court for challenging the identical impugned order which was, however, unconditionally withdrawn on 2-12-1982. Thereafter he preferred yet another Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No. 4875 of 1982. This came up before the learned single Judge and he recorded the following order :

(3.) Learned counsel for the appellant in assailing the aforesaid order had contended that a litigant is entitled to approach the Writ Court at any time and for any number of times for the same relief because a constitutional right had been given to him under Art.226 of the Constitution. In other words, the somewhat tall submission forcefully pressed was that till the time a petition filed by the litigant was disposed of on merits by passing a speaking order, the right of the litigant was not taken away nor could he be precluded from filing the petition under Art.226 if his earlier petitions were disposed of without dealing with the controversy on merits.