https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=325579 A writ petition under Article 32 seeking the same reliefs on the same factual basis as an already pending Article 226 petition was treated as impermissible duplication. Because the earlier High Court petition had been admitted and remained pending, the Supreme Court considered the second constitutional petition a misuse of the judicial process. The writ petition was therefore held not maintainable and dismissed as an abuse of process. en-us Wed, 09 Mar 2016 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 23 Mar 2016 09:55:58 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=325579 A writ petition under Article 32 seeking the same reliefs on the same factual basis as an already pending Article 226 petition was treated as impermissible duplication. Because the earlier High Court petition had been admitted and remained pending, the Supreme Court considered the second constitutional petition a misuse of the judicial process. The writ petition was therefore held not maintainable and dismissed as an abuse of process. Case-Laws Indian Laws Wed, 09 Mar 2016 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=325579