Shyam Deo Prasad Singh vs The State Of Jharkhand & Ors
2021 Latest Caselaw 1867 Jhar

                                                  1



             IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
                              W.P. (S) No. 324 of 2020
      Shyam Deo Prasad Singh                          ...               Petitioner
                                    Vs.
      The State of Jharkhand & Ors.                   ...               Respondents
                                                 ----------

                    CORAM:         THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DR. S.N.PATHAK
                                  (Through: Video Conferencing)
             For the Petitioner           : Mr. A.Allam, Sr. Advocate
             For the Respondents          : Mrs. Vandan Singh, Sr. SC-III
                                          -----------

07/ 09.06.2021      Mr. A. Allam, learned Sr. counsel for the petitioner submits that the

petitioner had approached this Court earlier by filing writ petition being W.P. 5153 of 2017 and this Court on the specific prayer of the learned counsel for the petitioner, wherein he confined his prayer for payment of gratuity amount only, directed the respondents to pay the gratuity amount, which was withheld illegally on the ground of pending of a criminal case.

Subsequently, the said order was challenged before the Hon'ble Division Bench, taking a plea that no such concession was given by the learned counsel at the time of hearing and in fact it appears to be an error of record. The Hon'ble Division Bench, sitting in LPA Court refused to entertain the submission of learned counsel and a direction was given to approach before the learned Single Judge, by preferring a Review Application and no opinion was expressed by the Court on the merits. Pursuant thereto, a review application being Civil Review No. 133 of 2019 was filed before this Court and vide order dated 24.01.2020, the same was dismissed with an observation that 'however, if petitioner is still aggrieved, he may file fresh writ petition as and when cause of action arises'. Pursuant to which, present writ petition has been filed by the learned counsel for the petitioner.

Mrs. Vandana Singh, learned counsel for the respondents raises preliminary objection and states that this writ petition is not maintainable as it is barred by constructive res judicata. To buttress her argument, learned counsel places heavy reliance on the reported judgment of Hon'ble Apex Court in case of Forward Construction Co. & Ors. Vs. Prabhat Mandal (Regd.), Andheri & Ors. & other analogous cases.

However, learned Sr. counsel for the petitioner submits that plea of constructive res judicata does not apply in the instant case.

The matter requires detailed hearing.

Admit.

Rule is made returnable after six months.

(Dr. S.N. Pathak, J.) punit/-