1. Writ petition involving allegations of mala fides dismissed by High Court in limine without notice. (Para 2 )
Back
Next 
1998 Supreme(SC) 657
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
B.N. KIRPAL AND A.P. MISRA, JJ.
The Yadavindra Public School Association, Appellant
Versus
State of Punjab and others, Respondents.
Civil Appeal No. 3376 of 1998 (arising out of S. L. P. (C) No. 21043 of 1997), D/- 17-7-1998.
Opportunity to respondent to file an affidavit and decide the case on merits when serious allegations of mala fides are raised.
Headnote:
Mala Fides - Writ Petition - Opportunity to Respondent - Setting Aside High Court Judgment
Fact of the Case:
Serious allegations of mala fides raised in the writ petition. High Court dismissed the writ petition without notice to the respondent.
Finding of the Court:
The court found it inappropriate for the High Court to dismiss the writ petition without giving an opportunity to the respondent to file an affidavit and decide the case on merits. The judgment of the High Court was set aside, and the case was restored to the file of the High Court for decision in accordance with the law. Appellant should not be dispossessed pending disposal of the writ petition.
Issues: Allegations of mala fides, dismissal of writ petition without notice to respondent.
Ratio Decidendi: When serious allegations of mala fides are raised and the person against whom the allegations are made has been impleaded as a respondent, it is appropriate to give an opportunity to the person concerned to file an affidavit and then decide the case on merits.
Final Decision: Judgment of the High Court set aside, and the case restored to the file of the High Court for decision in accordance with the law. Appellant should not be dispossessed pending disposal of the writ petition.
Legal Category Hierarchy
-
constitutional law
-
writ jurisdiction
-
practice and procedure
- dismissal in limine (Para 2)
-
practice and procedure
-
writ jurisdiction
Table of Contents
2. Allegations of mala fides against an impleaded respondent necessitating an opportunity to file an affidavit and a decision on merits. (Para 2 )
3. High Court erred in dismissing a writ petition in limine without notice when serious allegations of mala fides were raised against an impleaded respondent. (Para 2 )
4. Writ petitions involving serious allegations of mala fides against impleaded respondents should not be dismissed in limine without providing the respondent an opportunity to file an affidavit. (Para 2 )
5. High Court judgment set aside, writ petition restored for decision, and appellant protected from dispossession pending disposal. (Para 2 )
6. Is it appropriate for a High Court to dismiss a writ petition in limine and without notice when serious allegations of mala fides are raised?
No. When serious allegations of mala fides are raised and the person against whom they are made is impleaded as a respondent, the respondent should be given an opportunity to file an affidavit before the case is decided on its merits. (Para 2 )
JUDGMENT :- Leave granted.
2. Considering that serious allegations of mala fides have been raised in the writ petition, it was not appropriate, in our opinion, for the High Court to have dismissed the writ petition by a detailed order in limine and without notice. When such allegations of mala fides are raised and the person against whom the allegations are made has been impleaded as a respondent it would be appropriate to give an opportunity to the person concerned to file an affidavit and then to decide the case on merits. Without expressing any opinion on the merits of this case, we set aside the judgment of the High Court and restore the CWP No. 16047/97 to the file of the High Court for decision in accordance with law. Pending disposal of the writ petition the appellant should not be dispossessed.
Order accordingly.
