The court confirms that once disputes between parties in a writ petition are settled and recorded, the petition may be disposed of without further order. This approach upholds established practice in constitutional writ jurisdiction and serves as binding authority for similar future scenarios in the Calcutta High Court and subordinate courts.
Summary
| Category | Data |
|---|---|
| Case Name | WPA/5291/2025 of SRI UJJAL BISWAS AND ORS. Vs THE DISTRICT MAGISTRATE NORTH 24 PARGANAS AND ORS. |
| CNR | WBCHCA0105312025 |
| Date of Registration | 05-03-2025 |
| Decision Date | 01-09-2025 |
| Disposal Nature | DISPOSED |
| Judgment Author | HON’BLE JUSTICE AMRITA SINHA |
| Court | Calcutta High Court |
| Bench | Single, Constitutional Writ Jurisdiction (Court No. 14) |
| Precedent Value | Binding authority within the Calcutta High Court jurisdiction |
| Type of Law | Constitutional / Writ, Civil Practice |
| Questions of Law | Whether a writ petition can be disposed of when parties intimate that the dispute is settled |
| Ratio Decidendi |
When it is submitted before the court that the dispute between writ petitioners and contesting respondents stands settled, there is no need for the court to pass any further order on the writ petition. This practice ensures judicial economy and accords finality to proceedings once parties reach private settlement. The writ petition may then be formally disposed of, upon such submission from either party, especially where no contest remains. The order for disposal may also provide for urgent certified copies to facilitate implementation. |
| Facts as Summarised by the Court | The learned advocate for the petitioners submitted that disputes between the parties had already been settled. In light of this submission, the court held that there was no requirement of passing any further order and disposed of the writ petition. |
Practical Impact
| Category | Impact |
|---|---|
| Binding On | All subordinate courts and benches within Calcutta High Court’s jurisdiction |
| Persuasive For | Other High Courts considering similar procedural circumstances |
What’s New / What Lawyers Should Note
- Express acknowledgment by the court that a writ petition may be disposed of upon parties’ intimation of settlement, without the need for substantive adjudication.
- Advocates should promptly inform the court of any settlement to secure early disposal and avoid unnecessary litigation costs.
- The format of order records settlement as an operative ground for disposal, useful for reference in future writs involving settlement.
Summary of Legal Reasoning
- The court recorded the submission of the petitioners’ counsel that the dispute between parties stood settled.
- Upon such submission, the bench found no necessity to pass any further order in the writ petition.
- The petition was accordingly disposed of, prioritizing judicial economy and acknowledging the consensual resolution outside court.
Arguments by the Parties
Petitioner:
- Submitted that disputes between the parties have already been settled.
Respondents:
- No contesting submission recorded; represented by counsel.
Factual Background
The writ petition arose from a dispute between the petitioners and the respondents. During the hearing in constitutional writ jurisdiction, counsel for the petitioners informed the court that the differences had been resolved. This submission led the court to dispose of the petition as no live dispute remained.
Statutory Analysis
- The judgment operates under writ jurisdiction (constitutional) but does not discuss or interpret specific statutes, as the matter was settled and disposed of on procedural ground based on parties’ submissions.
Dissenting / Concurring Opinion Summary
No dissenting or concurring opinions recorded; single-judge bench.
Procedural Innovations
- Confirms the procedural practice that a writ petition may be disposed of summarily if the court is satisfied that settlement between parties extinguishes the dispute.
Alert Indicators
- ✔ Precedent Followed – Existing practice of disposing of matters upon settlement is affirmed.
Citations
- No neutral citations, SCC or AIR references specified in the judgment text.
- CNR: WBCHCA0105312025
- Case No.: WPA 5291 of 2025