The Calcutta High Court confirmed that dismissal of a writ petition for default, in the absence of the petitioner, amounts only to a procedural disposal and does not determine any legal question or the merits of the case. This judgment follows existing precedent rather than setting new law, and is of procedural relevance for practitioners handling writ petitions.
Summary
| Category | Data |
|---|---|
| Case Name | WPA/23404/2019 of MD. ZINNAH ALI Vs STATE OF WEST BENGAL & ORS |
| CNR | WBCHCA0515792019 |
| Date of Registration | 13-12-2019 |
| Decision Date | 01-09-2025 |
| Disposal Nature | DISMISSED FOR DEFAULT |
| Judgment Author | HON’BLE JUSTICE PARTHA SARATHI CHATTERJEE |
| Court | Calcutta High Court |
| Precedent Value | Persuasive only; procedural precedent |
| Type of Law | Procedural (Writ; default dismissal) |
| Ratio Decidendi |
The High Court dismissed the writ petition due to non-appearance of the petitioner. There was no adjudication on the merits of the case. Such procedural dismissal does not lay down any substantive legal principle, nor does it determine the legality of underlying rights or claims. The order clarifies that in cases of default, the petition may be dismissed without costs or further consideration. |
| Facts as Summarised by the Court | When the writ petition was called, there was no appearance for the petitioner. Respondent No. 4 was represented. The Court, therefore, proceeded to dismiss the writ petition for default. |
Practical Impact
| Category | Impact |
|---|---|
| Binding On | Procedural only; does not bind on merits in future matters |
| Persuasive For |
Lawyers handling similar procedural defaults; may be cited as procedural precedent on dismissal for non-appearance |
What’s New / What Lawyers Should Note
- The order is a procedural example where a writ petition was dismissed solely on the ground of the petitioner’s non-appearance.
- No legal issue was determined on the merits; the dismissal was without costs.
- Lawyers should note the importance of ensuring presence or representation when their matters are called.
- The case underscores that such dismissals do not resolve underlying substantive disputes.
Summary of Legal Reasoning
- The Court noted that there was no appearance for the petitioner when the matter was called.
- In accordance with procedural norms, a writ petition can be dismissed for default in the absence of the petitioner or their counsel.
- No costs were imposed, and the dismissal order does not affect the merits of the underlying legal claims.
Arguments by the Parties
Petitioner
No appearance; no arguments advanced.
Respondent No. 4
Represented by counsel; court record does not indicate submission of any substantive arguments, as dismissal was for default.
Factual Background
When WPA/23404/2019 was called before the Calcutta High Court, no one appeared for the writ petitioner. Respondent No. 4 was present through counsel. Given the absence of the petitioner, the Court dismissed the writ petition for default, without adjudicating any issue on its merits.
Statutory Analysis
- The judgment does not record discussion or interpretation of any statutory provisions.
Dissenting / Concurring Opinion Summary
- No dissenting or concurring opinions are recorded in the judgment.
Procedural Innovations
- No new procedural innovations are mentioned in the judgment.
Alert Indicators
- ✔ Precedent Followed – Procedural dismissal in event of default confirmed.
Citations
- No formal law report citation or paragraph number indicated in the order.