Madras High Court: Cannot Entertain Writ Petition in which Facts are Disputed

judge hammer Law Insider

Paridhi Arya

Published on: April 12, 2022 at 15:51 IST

The Bench of Madras High Court of Justice S.M Subramaniam has Observed while disposing the Writ Petition that Petitioner being a Workman Governed under Service Rules and Pension Scheme so he should first seek Relief from Labour Court.

The Litigant in the present Case directly knocked the door of High Court under Article 226 without exhausting the remedies available in other Statues; this will increase the Multiplicity of Proceedings because High Courts power is limited in such Cases.

“The Justice Delivery System should thrive hard to ensure that the aggrieved persons get Speedy Justice and their genuine Grievances are redressed in accordance with Law. Contrary, if they were driven to Court repeatedly and finally their grievances are not addressed or redressed then the faith in the Justice Delivery System is in peril and therefore the Courts are expected to be cautious in dealing with the Multiplicity of the Proceedings and possibility of creating Multiplicity Proceedings and to ensure that the issues are decided on the merits at the first instance itself once the Issues are decided and the Rights of the Parties are crystallized then all appropriate relieves can be granted even in Writ Petition filed for a direction to consider the representation” observed by Bench.

In this question is not about maintainability of Writ but entertainability of Writ Petition. Under Article 226 all the Writs Maintainable but it can be entertained or not decided on the basis of Rights of Parties and their Infringement.

Consequently, the parties should first Exhaust all remedies under the Statuettes and Service Rule and then also if party feels aggrieved than they can approach to High Court

“The Power of Judicial Review under 226 of the Constitution of India is to ensure the process through which the decision is taken by the competent Authorities in consonance with the Statues and the Rules in Force, but in a decision itself. This being the Scope under the Constitution the High Court need not venture into an Adjudication of the Disputed Facts between the parties at all circumstances” Court said.

In this Case Petitioner need to first seek Relief under Labour Court and then if his problems were not Redressed than he should approach to High Court so that Factual Findings of Labour Court will help High Court in deciding the Matter.

Related Post