https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=428906 A preliminary objection to writ maintainability failed because the petitioners were not parties to the earlier matter and were not merely seeking reopening of a final order. The SC noted that rejection of earlier recall applications did not foreclose other remedies, and that a later Article 32 petition is not barred simply because a related issue was previously considered. It also observed that the earlier decision did not appear to address the required balance between the right to information and the right to privacy, so the writ petitions were held maintainable and the objection rejected. en-us Fri, 30 Sep 2022 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 14 Oct 2022 11:51:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=428906 A preliminary objection to writ maintainability failed because the petitioners were not parties to the earlier matter and were not merely seeking reopening of a final order. The SC noted that rejection of earlier recall applications did not foreclose other remedies, and that a later Article 32 petition is not barred simply because a related issue was previously considered. It also observed that the earlier decision did not appear to address the required balance between the right to information and the right to privacy, so the writ petitions were held maintainable and the objection rejected. Case-Laws Indian Laws Fri, 30 Sep 2022 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=428906