Res judicata in writ proceedings bars a fresh challenge to a penalty order after an earlier petition failed on merits.

A writ petition challenging a penalty order was held barred by res judicata because an earlier writ between the same parties had already questioned the legality of that order and been dismissed on merits. The court applied res judicata, including constructive res judicata, to Article 226 proceedings, holding that matters which might and ought to have been raised earlier are concluded. It also noted that the underlying assessment order had never been challenged, had attained finality, and no material was shown to treat it as a nullity. The petition was dismissed with costs.

---

---

Issues: Whether the writ petition challenging the penalty order was barred by res judicata, including constructive res judicata, in view of the earlier writ petition decided between the parties.

Analysis: The prior writ petition had already challenged the legality of the penalty order and had been dismissed on merits. Principles of res judicata apply to proceedings under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, and the rule of constructive res judicata also applies so that contentions which might and ought to have been raised earlier are treated as concluded. The assessment order had never been challenged, had attained finality, and no specific basis was shown to treat it as a nullity.

Conclusion: The writ petition was barred by res judicata and, in any event, the challenge to the penalty order disclosed no merit. The petition was dismissed with costs.

---