Sweety Nagar v. State Of Haryana And Another
!
"
$ %
! !
"#$#%&
&
%##'
()*
%
& '
+,() -).("
!
'
( ) /# % *- %
# ,
- ! ) - 012 !
3 !
!
%
!
%%- ! 44
-( %
-
44
#
!
-- +%!
%
!
-
*
+ 1 ) 0 % 5 - '
! - %
% # *
6% 5 %
%%- + " * ( %
# %%-
-
(#
(# , - 44
/# %
+ !
% ! #
* - *
## %
- /#
( %
- 2 , *
7) 8!
29
% %
%
/#
% *
2 :
- + %
/# %
# --
,* - 0 ## + *
2 7) 8!
9 /#
( %
- 5) 0 ## - + *4 # *
7) 8!
9 "
!
!,+
%
# -
%
- ( %%
-- %
:
!
#
( % !-, !%
( * #
!+
*
2 7) 8!
9% 5) 26 ( *4 # # !
#
% %!,-# * - % *
)!#( - + %
,
! 44
6 ; - ( -
! -!,+
% %
!- +
,- - %- !%,
%
% *4 # 2 #-- + * %
*
,
*4 # "
!
!,+
%
# %!
<!
#
- %%-
+# # - + %
- +%!
;%
(# * (# %%-
+( %
- +
# # -# -- !%- %%-
+ "
* #
-
! - %
% ! -
( %%
%
+ '
+%
- +###
:
0 5) 0 ### ,
+ * # 0 It is settled law that once an issue has been adjudicated and attained finality, its re-agitation is impermissible. Multiplicity of proceedings without any new cause or substantive ground runs contrary to justice and public policy, and constitutes an abuse of process. The Hon'ble Supreme Court, in a catena of judgments, has categorically held that the principle of Res Judicata would be applicable to the writ proceedings as well and persistence in filing proceedings which re-agitate settled claims amounts to vexatious litigation. 7.
Further, the Hon'ble Supreme Court has concluded that there can be no doubt that the principle of constructive Res Judicata, as explained in Explanation IV to Section 11 CPC, is also applicable to writ petitions. Reliance in this regard can be placed on Devilal Modi v. Sales Tax Officer, Ratlam and Others 1964 SCC OnLine SC 17, State of U.P. v. Nawab Hussain 1977 2 SCC 806, Forward Construction Co. v. Prabhat Mandal (Regd.) (1986) 1 SCC 100. 8.
In view of the discussion above, the present writ petition cannot be considered. Thus, the present writ petition is hereby dismissed. ( !
)
#
%
'
= 1 #
%
,- = 1