RAJESHWAR PRASAD Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD learned counsel for the petitioner and the State.

(2.) THE petitioner came to this Court earlier in CWJC No. 4706 of 2001 with a claim to be considered for appointment on the post of Chaukidar based on descent. This Court found no merit in his claim. It is a matter of common knowledge that when the petitioner is unable to persuade the Court to grant relief, instead of obtaining an order of dismissal barring all doors, the petitioner prefers to withdraw his writ application to pursue the matter before the authority. When a Court passes order of this nature, it only grants a grace. The original refusal of the Court holding that the petitioner had no claim on merits does not get softened or watered down. If the petitioner files a representation thereafter and the authority rejects his representation, it is difficult to hold that he has fresh cause of action now, when this Court after hearing him on merits did not find any substance in the matter. This Court has no hesitation in holding that after the writ petition was declined interference on merits, the petitioner cannot be permitted to make out a fresh cause of action based on such representation filed by him in a grace granted by the Court.

(3.) THIS Court can do no better than to quote the following passage from the judgment of the Supreme Court in (2008)10 SCC 115 (C. Jacob V/s. Director of Geology and Mining & Another) at paragraphs 8,9, 10,11 &14.