Does the doctrine of res judicata apply to writ proceedings? Give reasons in support of the answer and also refer to the case law, if any, on the point.

Question: Does the doctrine of res judicata apply to writ proceedings? Give reasons in support of the answer and also refer to the case law, if any, on the point.

Find the answer to the mains question only on Legal Bites. [Does the doctrine of res judicata apply to writ proceedings? Give reasons in support of the answer and also refer to the case law, if any, on the point.]

Answer

A writ has been defined in Article 32 and Article 226 of the Constitution of India. Article 32 has given the power to the Supreme court to issue writs whereas the same power is granted to High courts in Article 226.

The doctrine of Res Judicata also applies to writ proceedings under Article 32 of the Indian Constitution. A writ petition under Article 226 is filed before the judicature i.e High Court, challenging the detention of a person that is dismissed. A writ petition under Article 32 is filed before the Hon’ble Supreme Court.

In the case of Daryao v. State of Uttar Pradesh (AIR 1961 SC 1475) the Hon’ble Supreme Court observed: “The rule of res judicata as indicated in Sec 11 of the code of Civil Procedure has no doubt it has some technical aspects but for further instance, the rule of constructive res judicata may be said to be technical; but the basis on which the said rule is founded on the consideration of public policy”.

This case has extensively dealt with the question of applicability of the principle of res judicata in writ proceedings and laid down certain principles. They are-

1. When a petition under Article 226 is considered, contested on merits, and is dismissed, the decision would continue to bind the parties unless it is otherwise modified or reversed by appeal or other appropriate proceedings as prescribed under the Constitution.
2. It would not be open to a party to ignore the said judgment and more the Supreme Court under Article 32 by an original petition made on the same facts and for obtaining the same or similar orders or writs.
3. A dismissal of a writ petition under Article 226 by any High Court not on merit but due to laches of the petitioner or when the party has an alternative remedy available with them, the dismissal for the writ petition would not constitute a bar to a subsequent petition under Article 32.
4. Such a dismissal may, however, constitute a bar to a subsequent application under Article 32 where and if the facts thus found by the High Court by themselves relevant even under Article 32.
5. Whether the writ petition would constitute a bar would depend upon the nature of the order. There will be no bar if the order is on merits.
6. If the petition is dismissed in the timeline without a speaking order, such dismissal cannot be treated as creating a bar of res judicata.

---

Important Mains Questions Series for Judiciary, APO & University Exams

1. CPC Mains Questions Series: Important Questions Part – I of X
2. CPC Mains Questions Series: Important Questions Part – II of X
3. CPC Mains Questions Series: Important Questions Part – III of X
4. CPC Mains Questions Series: Important Questions Part – IV of X
5. CPC Mains Questions Series: Important Questions Part – V of X
6. CPC Mains Questions Series: Important Questions Part – VI of X
7. CPC Mains Questions Series: Important Questions Part – VII of X
8. CPC Mains Questions Series: Important Questions Part – VIII of X
9. CPC Mains Questions Series: Important Questions Part – IX of X
10. CPC Mains Questions Series: Important Questions Part – X of X