Patna HC Lets Six Bihar Bar Council Campus Shopholders Withdraw Writ, Pursue Other Remedy Within One Month

The petitioners were agreement holders of shops on the Bihar State Bar Council campus

The respondents contended that the writ petition was not maintainable against a private body and that the petitioners should pursue their grievances before the appropriate authority or civil court

The Court considered the maintainability objection and the applicability of S. Shobha v. Muthoot Finance Ltd., then the petitioners sought permission to withdraw the writ petition with liberty to pursue an appropriate remedy

Article 226 permits judicial review of a body where the relevant action involves a public duty or function; a writ may issue to a private body in exceptional cases where a public duty is imposed by statute or statutory rule, and the claim has a public-law element.

The Court relied on S. Shobha v. Muthoot Finance Ltd., (2025) 11 SCC 335, particularly paragraphs 7–9, for these principles

The Court also stated that disputed questions of fact could not be adjudicated under Article 226 in the present matter

The Court referred to S. Shobha and recorded the respondents’ maintainability objection, but did not determine the underlying dispute or conclusively decide the petition’s maintainability.

It considered that disputed questions of fact were involved and, after the petitioners sought withdrawal, allowed them to pursue their remedy before an appropriate forum

The petitioners were granted liberty to pursue a remedy before the appropriate forum within one month of receiving a copy of the order.

The forum was directed to decide the matter expeditiously in accordance with law and to consider limitation, given that the matter dated from 2019