Facts
The appellant, The Railway Employees Cooperative Credit Society Ltd., filed four intra-court writ appeals against a common interim order dated 25.02.2026 passed by a Single Judge in W.M.P. Nos. 52588, 52604, 52617 52673 of 2025
Source reference: p. 3The appellant contended that the interim orders were granted without affording them an opportunity to be heard, as they only became aware of the order after the court hearing had concluded
Source reference: para. 3The respondents (employees of the society) did not deny these factual assertions regarding the lack of a hearing
Source reference: para. 5Issues
1. Whether the interim order passed by the learned Single Judge is sustainable in law given the alleged violation of the principles of natural justice
Source reference: para. 3-5Law Applied
Clause 15 of the Letters Patent, which governs the maintainability of intra-court appeals
Source reference: p. 2Fundamental principle of Audi Alteram Partem (the right to be heard), ensuring that no party is prejudiced by a judicial order without a fair opportunity to defend their case
Source reference: para. 4-5Reasoning
The Division Bench observed that the appellant was significantly prejudiced because the interim relief was granted by the writ court without hearing their side of the argument
Source reference: para. 3Since the learned counsel for the respondents could not deny that the appellant was unheard during the initial proceedings, the court found a clear procedural infirmity
Source reference: para. 5The Bench determined that to ensure justice, the matter required a fresh adjudication where all parties could present their merits, rather than the appellate court deciding on the substantive merits of the writ petitions at this stage
Source reference: para. 5Holding
The High Court allowed the Writ Appeals and set aside the common interim order dated 25.02.2026
The matter was remanded back to the Writ Court for fresh adjudication on its merits, with a specific direction to afford an opportunity to all parties to be heard; the court clarified that it expressed no opinion on the merits of the underlying dispute and closed all connected miscellaneous petitions without costs
Source reference: para. 5-6Original Court PDF
THE CHIEF EXECUTIVEvsK. Vijayalakshmi
Click to open original judgment
Original judgment, available to read, download and summarize on LawLens.in