1. Writ petition under Article 32 of the Constitution challenging a judgment already passed by the court. (Para 1 )
Back
Next 
2000 Supreme(SC) 295
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
B.N.Kirpal : S.Saghir Ahmad
X
Versus
Hospital Z
Case No. : 27 , 967 of 1989
Date of Decision : 2/7/00
A writ petition under Article 32 of the Constitution of India is not maintainable if it seeks to challenge, overrule, or set aside a judgment already passed by the Supreme Court.
Headnote:(A) Constitution of India - Article 32 - Writ Petition against judgment of Supreme Court - Maintainability - A writ petition under Article 32 of the Constitution against a judgment already passed by the Supreme Court cannot be entertained. (Para 1)
Facts of the case:
A petition was filed under Article 32 of the Constitution seeking to overrule or set aside a judgment previously delivered by the Supreme Court. During the proceedings, the petitioner agreed to delete the prayers seeking to overrule the judgment and requested that the petition be treated as an application for clarification or directions in the previously decided case.
Findings of Court:
The court directed that the matter should not be treated as a writ petition under Article 32 but should be registered as an interlocutory application for clarification and directions in the original civil appeal.
Issues: Whether a writ petition under Article 32 of the Constitution is maintainable to challenge or overrule a judgment already passed by the Supreme Court.
Ratio Decidendi: A writ petition under Article 32 cannot be entertained if it is directed against a judgment already passed by the Supreme Court itself.
Result: Petition registered as an IA for clarification/directions.
Legal Category Hierarchy
Table of Contents
2. Submission to treat the writ petition as an application for clarification or directions in a previously decided case. (Para 1 )
3. A writ petition under Article 32 of the Constitution cannot be entertained against a judgment already passed by the court. (Para 1 )
4. A writ petition under Article 32 is not maintainable to challenge a judgment already delivered by the same court. (Para 1 )
5. Petition registered as an application for clarification/directions; notice issued to respondents; intervention application allowed. (Para 2 , 3 , 4 )
6. Whether a writ petition under Article 32 of the Constitution is maintainable against a judgment already passed by the Supreme Court?
No, a writ petition under Article 32 of the Constitution cannot be entertained against a judgment already passed by the court. (Para 1 )
(1) WRIT Petition under Article 32 of the Constitution against the judgment already passed by this court cannot be entertained. Learned counsel for the petitioner stated that prayer (a) which seeks overruling or setting aside of the judgment already passed in Mr. X v. Hospital Z (1998) 8 SCC 296 may be deleted. This prayer shall accordingly be deleted. So also, the other prayers which indirectly concern the correctness of the judgment already passed shall stand deleted. Learned counsel for the petitioner stated that the petition may not be treated as a petition under Article 32 of the Constitution but may be treated as an application for clarification/ directions in the case already decided by this Court, viz. Mr. X v. Hospital Z (C.A. No. 4641/1998).
(2) WE direct that the office shall not treat this as a writ petition filed under Article 32, but shall register it separately as an IA for clarification/directions in C.A. No. 4641/1998.
(3) NOTICE of this I.A. returnable within two weeks shall be issued to National Aids Control Organisation, Union of India and Indian Medical Association which is already represented in IA No. 2-3. Notice shall also go to Medical council of India. Dasti service is permitted in addition.
(4) I.A. No. 4 for intervention is allowed.
(5) SPECIAL Leave Petition DNo. 2282/ 2000 shall be listed along with these IAs.
