High Court must decide writ on merits when earlier judgment is clear; interim salary protection continued pending fresh decision.

Where a High Court is faced with rival readings of an earlier judgment, it must decide the pending writ petition on its own merits rather than decline adjudication and send the parties to seek clarification from the Supreme Court. The earlier judgment was treated as clear enough not to require clarification, so the impugned order was set aside and the writ petition restored for expeditious merits determination. Interim protection was preserved by directing continuation of payment of the last drawn salary to the concerned employees until the writ petition is decided.

---

---

Issues: Whether the High Court was justified in disposing of the writ petition without deciding the merits and directing the party to seek clarification from the Supreme Court; and whether the impugned order should be set aside with a direction for fresh decision on merits.

Analysis: The High Court was confronted with rival interpretations of an earlier judgment and was expected to decide the writ petition on its own merits in the light of its understanding of that judgment. Instead, it declined to adjudicate the dispute and directed the petitioner to approach the Supreme Court for clarification. The earlier judgment was held to be sufficiently clear and not requiring clarification. Since the respondent had not filed an appeal against the impugned order, the Court did not enter upon the merits of the substantive controversy, but considered it appropriate to preserve the interim protection regarding payment of the last drawn salary pending disposal of the writ petition.

Conclusion: The impugned order was set aside and the writ petition was restored to the High Court for decision on merits expeditiously. The appellants were directed to continue paying the last drawn salary to the concerned employees until the writ petition was decided.

Final Conclusion: The controversy was sent back to the High Court for a merits determination, while the interim monetary protection for the employees was maintained pending that decision.

Ratio Decidendi: Where a High Court faces competing interpretations of an earlier judgment, it must decide the pending writ on merits according to its own interpretation rather than refuse adjudication and direct the parties to seek clarification from the superior court.

---