Facts of the Case

The petitioner, Praful Surana, had originally filed a writ petition before the Delhi High Court. During earlier proceedings dated 30.05.2023, counsel for the petitioner sought permission to withdraw the writ petition on the ground that an assessment order had already been passed, and liberty was requested to pursue alternative remedies in accordance with law.

Subsequently, the petitioner filed an application seeking recall of the withdrawal order dated 30.05.2023. However, it was not disputed that after the withdrawal, the petitioner had already filed a statutory appeal against the assessment order.

Issues Involved

  1. Whether a withdrawal order of a writ petition can be recalled after liberty was granted to pursue alternative remedies.
  2. Whether filing of a statutory appeal bars reconsideration of the withdrawal order.
  3. Whether the recall application had merit in the facts of the case.

Petitioner’s Arguments

  • The petitioner sought recall of the order dated 30.05.2023, contending that the withdrawal of the writ petition required reconsideration.
  • It was implied that the withdrawal may not have been appropriate or warranted under the circumstances.

Respondent’s Arguments

  • The respondents opposed the application, emphasizing that:
    • The writ petition had been voluntarily withdrawn.
    • Liberty had already been granted to pursue alternate remedies.
    • The petitioner had in fact availed the statutory remedy by filing an appeal, making the recall application untenable.

Court’s Findings / Order

The Delhi High Court observed:

  • The withdrawal of the writ petition was made on instructions by counsel.
  • Liberty had already been granted to pursue remedies under law.
  • The petitioner had already exercised such remedy by filing a statutory appeal.
  • In light of these facts, the Court held that the recall application was completely without merit.

Final Order

  • The application for recall was dismissed.
  • Parties were directed to act on the digitally signed copy of the order.

Important Clarification by Court

  • Once a writ petition is withdrawn with liberty to pursue alternate remedies, and such remedies are actually pursued, a recall application cannot be entertained casually.
  • The Court reaffirmed that procedural finality must be respected, especially where statutory remedies have already been invoked.

Sections Involved

  • Article 226 of the Constitution of India – Writ jurisdiction of High Courts
  • Income Tax Act, 1961 – Pertaining to assessment orders and statutory appeals
  • Principles governing withdrawal of petitions and recall of judicial orders

Link to download the order -https://delhihighcourt.nic.in/app/showFileJudgment/60802082023CW76242023_092842.pdf

Disclaimer

This content is shared strictly for general information and knowledge purposes only. Readers should independently verify the information from reliable sources. It is not intended to provide legal, professional, or advisory guidance. The author and the organisation disclaim all liability arising from the use of this content. The material has been prepared with the assistance of AI tools.