Mere Issuance of Notice Does Not Attract Doctrine of ‘Stare Decisis’ : MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT
It has been reaffirmed by the Madhya Pradesh High Court that the mere issuing of notice on a petition does not impose a ‘binding precedent’ on courts, as it does not lay down any proposition of law to be followed in the future.
This case of M/S Keshav Kanshkar A Class Electrical Contractor v. The Principal Secretary Department Of Energy Mantralaya Vallabh Bhawan Bhopal & Ors. Was decided by Justice Vivek Agarwal.
FACTS OF THE CASE-
Here, an electrical contractor is asking a court to issue a writ of mandamus ordering the defendants to pay him for services done under the “Sobhagya Yojna Scheme.”
The petitioner stated that a coordination bench of this court had previously given notice under identical circumstances. He argued that since temporary relief had been given in four other cases, then he should be entitled to it as well. He argued further that it could be inappropriate to grant him the interim relief only on the grounds that the subject needs to be heard ultimately.
JUDGEMENT-
The court ruled that the Petitioner has no legal standing to have the petition admitted in the first place since the issuing of notice is not a precedent that can be used to rely on the’stare decisis’ legal principle.
It has been reaffirmed by the Madhya Pradesh High Court that the mere issuing of notice on a petition does not impose a ‘binding precedent’ on courts, as it does not lay down any proposition of law to be followed in the future.
“PRIME LEGAL is a full-service law firm that has won a National Award and has more than 20 years of experience in an array of sectors and practice areas. Prime legal falls into the category of the best law firm, best lawyer, best family lawyer, best divorce lawyer, best divorce law firm, best criminal lawyer, best criminal law firm, best consumer lawyer, best civil lawyer.”
Judgement reviewed by Deepa Bajaj.