The court emphasized the necessity of exhausting statutory remedies before seeking writ relief, particularly when prior litigation has established rights.

JUDGMENT :

NIRZAR S. DESAI, J.

1. By way of this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioners have prayed for following reliefs:

“(A) YOUR LORDSHIPS may be pleased to admit and allow the present petition.

(B) YOUR LORDSHIPS may be pleased to issue a writ of mandamus or a writ in the nature of mandamus or a writ of certiorari or any other appropriate writ, order or direction quashing and setting aside impugned proceedings being Tenancy Appeal No. 21 of 2019 in Tenancy Case No. 3 of 2012 (New Case No. 251 of 2016) and Tenancy Case No. 4 of 2012 (New Case No. 250 of 2016) and the impugned order dated 13.06.2022 of the respondent No. 3 to de novo decide the proceedings between the petitioners and the respondents No. 4.

(C) YOUR LORDSHIPS may be pleased to issue a writ in the nature of mandamus or a writ of certiorari or any other appropriate writ, order or direction permanently restraining the respondent No. 3 from proceeding further in Tenancy Case No. 251 of 2016 as per the directions of the respondent No. 2 in the impugned order dated 13.06.2022 as well as from proceedings in Tenancy Case No. 250 of 2016 pending with the respondent No. 2 and further holding that the respondents No. 2 & 3 have no jurisdiction or authority to proceed with Tenancy Case No. 3 of 2012 (New Case No. 251 of 2016) and Tenancy Case No. 4 of 2012 (New Case No. 250 of 2016).

(D) Pending hearing and final disposal of the captioned petition writ petition, YOUR LORDSHIPS may be pleased to stay the order dated 13.06.2022 passed in respondent No. 2 in Tenancy Appeal No. 21 of 2019 and restrain the respondent No. 3 from proceeding further in Tenancy Case No. 3 of 2012 (New Case No. 251 of 2016) and Tenancy Case No. 4 of 2012 (New Case No. 250 of 2016).

(E) Ad-interim relief in terms of Para 11 (C) be granted by this Hon’ble Court.

(F) Any other and further orders that are deemed necessary in the interests of justice may be passed.”

2. The matter was heard on 26.08.2022 and after hearing learned senior advocate Mr. Mihir Joshi assisted by learned advocate Mr. Abhishek Mehta for the petitioners, once the arguments were concluded, the matter was reserved for judgment.

2.1 Though the judgment was ready and was listed for pronouncement on 5.6.2023, the Court was informed by learned advocate Mr. Abhishek Mehta that the petitioners have preferred Letters Patent Appeal No. 637 of 2023 wherein the Division Bench of this Court vide order dated 1.5.2023 issued rule and made it returnable on 24.7.2023 and in the meantime, interim relief in terms of paragraph No. 15(B) (i) and (ii) was granted. Learned advocate Mr. Abhishek Mehta pointed out that the prayer made in the appeal is about stay of further proceedings of the present petition pending before this Court.

The above relief continued to operate till 26.9.2024 and ultimately, the Hon'ble Division Bench of this Court after taking note of the fact that the judgment which was kept reserved by this Court was ready for delivery since 2023, the appeal was dismissed and the relief granted was vacated. It is in view of this fact that though the matter was listed for pronouncement of judgment on 5.6.2023, the same is being pronounced today i.e. on 4.10.2024.

3. The brief facts, as stated in the petition, giving rise to filing of the present petition are as under:

3.1 The grievance of the petitioners is that respondent nos.4 and 5 having connivance with each other and by abusing and misusing process of law have tried to reopen the proceedings which have attained finality upto Hon’ble Supreme Court and though Respondent No. 5 was a party to the aforesaid proceedings, by way of this petition, she is trying to reopen the case which is impermissible under the law.

3.2 The present petitioner no. 1 purchased land bearing survey no. 157 and 158 of Village Bodakdev, Tal. Ghatlodia, District Ahmedabad in the year 1993 by way of registered sale-deed from Respondent No. 4 viz. Ramesh Ballubhai Desai. Thereafter in the year 199