The Jharkhand High Court upholds existing precedent by permitting the withdrawal of a writ petition with liberty to seek remedies under law, reaffirming the established procedural practice for litigants before subordinate and High Courts.
Summary
| Category | Data |
|---|---|
| Case Name |
WPC/2980/2024 of PHOOL KUMARI Vs STATE OF JHARKHAND CNR JHHC010164892024 |
| Date of Registration | 14-05-2024 |
| Decision Date | 10-09-2025 |
| Disposal Nature | Disposed Off |
| Judgment Author | HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH KUMAR |
| Court | High Court of Jharkhand |
| Precedent Value | Binding on subordinate courts within the territorial jurisdiction of Jharkhand |
| Type of Law | Procedural law / Writ jurisdiction |
| Questions of Law | Whether a writ petition can be withdrawn with liberty to work out alternative remedies. |
| Ratio Decidendi |
The High Court allowed withdrawal of the writ petition at the request of the petitioner, granting liberty to pursue alternative remedies in accordance with law. All counsels had no objection. The process reaffirms the established procedural principle that withdrawal with liberty is permissible when requested, provided parties do not raise objections. Pending interlocutory applications were also disposed of accordingly. |
| Facts as Summarised by the Court | The petitioner sought to withdraw the writ petition with liberty to explore other remedies; the request was not objected to by the respondents; the court permitted withdrawal with said liberty. |
Practical Impact
| Category | Impact |
|---|---|
| Binding On | All subordinate courts in Jharkhand and parties before the Jharkhand High Court |
| Persuasive For | Other High Courts and legal practitioners seeking procedural guidance |
What’s New / What Lawyers Should Note
- Reaffirms the practice that writ petitions may be withdrawn with liberty to pursue alternative remedies, provided none of the respondents object.
- Serves as a binding procedural precedent in Jharkhand for similar withdrawal applications in writ matters.
- Pending interlocutory applications are disposed of along with the main writ petition when it is withdrawn.
Summary of Legal Reasoning
- On the petitioner’s request to withdraw the writ petition with liberty to seek other remedies, the Court directly granted permission.
- The Court confirmed there was no objection from the counsels for the respondents.
- Accordingly, the writ petition was disposed of with liberty as sought, and all pending interlocutory applications were also disposed of.
- The orders reiterate well-established procedural flexibility afforded in writ proceedings regarding withdrawal of petitions.
Arguments by the Parties
Petitioner:
- Sought permission to withdraw the writ petition.
- Requested liberty to work out remedy in accordance with law.
Respondents:
- Stated they had no objection to the withdrawal with liberty.
Factual Background
The petitioner filed a writ petition before the Jharkhand High Court. During the hearing, the petitioner’s counsel sought to withdraw the petition, specifically requesting liberty to avail of remedies in accordance with law. The counsels representing the state and the Hazaribag Municipal Corporation had no objection. The High Court disposed of the matter accordingly.
Statutory Analysis
- The judgment is procedural and does not discuss nor interpret any statutory provisions.
- Focus is on the inherent power of the High Court in writ jurisdiction to permit withdrawal of petitions with liberty.
Procedural Innovations
No new procedural innovations or guidelines are introduced. The judgment applies the established practice of allowing writ withdrawal with liberty upon non-objection by respondents.
Alert Indicators
- ✔ Precedent Followed – The judgment applies and affirms existing procedural practice regarding withdrawal with liberty in writ petitions.