Constructive res judicata bars a fresh writ challenge where the guideline could have been attacked in the earlier round.

Constructive res judicata applies to writ proceedings as a matter of public policy, even though the CPC does not apply in its strict sense under Article 226. Because the earlier writ petition and intra-court appeal had already dealt with the petitioner's claim to reward, and Clause 3.3 of the Guidelines was available for challenge at that stage, a fresh writ attacking the guideline itself amounted to impermissible piecemeal litigation. The omission to raise that challenge earlier attracted the bar of constructive res judicata, and the writ petition was held not maintainable.

---

---

Issues: Whether the writ petition was barred by the principle of constructive res judicata because the challenge to Clause 3.3 of the Guidelines could and ought to have been raised in the earlier round of litigation.

Analysis: The broad principles underlying res judicata, including constructive res judicata, apply to writ proceedings as a matter of public policy, even though the Code of Civil Procedure does not apply in its strictest sense to proceedings under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. The earlier writ petition and intra-court appeal had already addressed the petitioner's claim to reward, and Clause 3.3 of the Guidelines was available to be challenged at that stage. Permitting a fresh challenge to the same reward dispute by attacking the guideline itself would allow piecemeal litigation and defeat the finality of prior adjudication. The omission to raise that challenge earlier therefore attracts the bar of constructive res judicata.

Conclusion: The writ petition was barred by constructive res judicata and was not maintainable.

---