US Constitution Trumps Presidential Tariff Powers
28 Feb 2026
Non-Compliance with Court Summons Amounts to Contempt: Allahabad HC Issues Warrant Against HDFC Life Branch Head in Cheating Bail Case
02 Mar 2026
Bank Can Adjust OTS Deposit on Borrower Default, No Cheating u/s 420 IPC: Delhi High Court
02 Mar 2026
Divij Kumar Quits CMS INDUSLAW for Independent Practice
03 Mar 2026
Global Lawyers Debate AI Liability in Autonomous Vehicles
03 Mar 2026
CCPA Fines Startup ₹8 Lakh for False Child Growth Claims
05 Mar 2026
Madras High Court Scoffs at Police Custody Injury Claim
05 Mar 2026
India's Criminal Investigations Face Systemic Conviction Crisis
05 Mar 2026
Kerala HC Slams TDB Financial Discipline in Ayyappa Conclave, Orders Auditor Report on Past Anomalies: High Court of Kerala
06 Mar 2026
Back
Next 
SANJAYA KUMAR MISHRA, ANANDA SEN
Gopal Prasad Mahanty – Appellant
Versus
state of Jharkhand – Respondent
Headnote: Read headnote
ORDER :
(Ananda Sen, J.)
1. This intra-court appeal under Clause 10 of the Letters Patent has been filed by the appellants-writ petitioners challenging the order dated 11.8.2021 passed in W.P.(C) No. 3002 of 2002, whereby, the learned Single Judge has held that the dispute being contractual in nature, writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India is not entertainable. However, liberty was granted to the petitioner to take appropriate recourse for enforcing the terms and conditions of the agreement and for payment of the alleged dues, if permissible under law.
2. The appellant-writ petitioner, who appears in person, submits that the writ petition could not have been dismissed in the manner as stated above. The writ petition was filed in the year 2002, but as the same was entertained and admitted for final hearing vide order dated 6.8.2003, on technical grounds, the same could not have been dismissed. According to the appellant-writ petitioner the dues are admitted and on false pretext, the same is bei
The court emphasized the importance of honoring contractual agreements and the need for parties to adhere to the terms of the contract. It also highlighted the significance of approaching the compete....
Disputes arising from contractual agreements with state bodies should generally be resolved in civil courts, not via writ petitions under Article 226.
The court established that costs can be contested separately from the merits of a case, and that prior rulings can influence decisions on cost impositions.
The court established that costs imposed in Writ proceedings can be contested and modified based on the circumstances and agreements of the parties involved.
The jurisdiction of the court under Article 226 of the Constitution cannot be ousted by an agreement executed between the parties.
The power to issue prerogative writs under Article 226 of the Constitution is not limited by any other provisions of the Constitution. The High Court has the discretion to entertain or not to enterta....
The court emphasized the limitations and parameters of exercising jurisdiction under Article 226, particularly in cases involving private contracts, and highlighted the need for detailed evidence and....
Judicial review under Article 226 cannot be restricted by statutory limitations; writ petitions can challenge Orders-in-Original even if appeals are time-barred.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
Listen Article