The Calcutta High Court has reaffirmed that challenging multiple separate assessment orders via a single writ petition is not maintainable, thereby upholding the established procedural requirement that each distinct cause be contested separately. The decision clarifies procedural law and strengthens its binding value for future challenges to assessment orders in similar contexts.
Summary
| Category | Data |
|---|---|
| Case Name | WPA/20192/2025 of JAFAR AHMED @ JAFAR AHMED MOLLA Vs CESC LIMITED AND ANR. |
| CNR | WBCHCA0407332025 |
| Date of Registration | 26-08-2025 |
| Decision Date | 01-09-2025 |
| Disposal Nature | DISMISSED |
| Judgment Author | HON’BLE JUSTICE KAUSIK CHANDA |
| Court | Calcutta High Court |
| Precedent Value | Binding within the territorial jurisdiction of the Calcutta High Court |
| Type of Law | Procedural Law |
| Questions of Law | Whether a single writ petition can be maintained to challenge multiple distinct assessment orders. |
| Ratio Decidendi |
The court held that it is not permissible to challenge multiple separate assessment orders through a single writ petition, as each assessment order constitutes a separate cause requiring an independent challenge. A combined pleading challenging three distinct assessment orders is procedurally unsustainable. The writ petition was dismissed for want of maintainability on these grounds. |
| Facts as Summarised by the Court | The petitioner sought to challenge three different assessment orders passed by the authorities, but elected to do so by way of a single writ petition through common pleadings. |
Practical Impact
| Category | Impact |
|---|---|
| Binding On | All subordinate courts and authorities within Calcutta High Court’s jurisdiction |
| Persuasive For | Other High Courts considering maintainability of writ petitions against multiple orders |
What’s New / What Lawyers Should Note
- The judgment expressly holds that multiple distinct assessment orders cannot be challenged through a single writ petition.
- Lawyers must file separate writ petitions for each assessment order they seek to challenge.
- Attempts to club multiple assessment orders into a single writ may result in outright dismissal for non-maintainability.
- Reinforces the need for clear demarcation of causes of action in writ pleadings.
Summary of Legal Reasoning
- The Court focused on the maintainability of writ proceedings challenging more than one assessment order through a unified pleading.
- It was expressly noted that “the petitioner challenges three separate assessment orders” and that “the three different assessment orders have been challenged by a common pleading.”
- The Court found this approach procedurally unacceptable, implying each order amounts to a distinct cause, necessitating individual challenges.
- Consequently, the writ petition was dismissed solely on the grounds of non-maintainability.
Arguments by the Parties
Petitioner:
- Sought to challenge three different assessment orders through a single writ petition.
Respondent (CESC Limited):
- Arguments not specified in the judgment.
Factual Background
The petitioner filed a writ petition before the Calcutta High Court seeking to challenge three separate assessment orders of CESC Limited. All three orders were contested through a single set of pleadings in WPA 20192 of 2025. The Court noted this cumulative approach and addressed only the procedural maintainability of such a challenge.
Statutory Analysis
- The judgment was limited to procedural law concerning the form and maintainability of writ petitions.
- No statutory provisions were discussed or interpreted in detail.
Procedural Innovations
- The judgment clarified that separate writ petitions must be filed for separate assessment orders, reinforcing an existing procedural standard.
Alert Indicators
- ✔ Precedent Followed – The Court reaffirmed existing procedural law on maintainability of writ petitions.
Citations
No further legal citations or paragraph numbers are recorded in the judgment for reporting.