Sri Lankan Repatriate’s Bid To Recover Original Certificates From Forest Corporation Fails Again, Madras HC Says Earlier Writ Decided Same Claim

The petitioner, a Sri Lankan ex-repatriate who had worked as a daily-wage night watchman, claimed that he submitted original testimonials during a 1990 selection process for Forest Watchers. Though initially selected subject to verification, he was not appointed because he did not meet the required height criterion.

His earlier petition seeking appointment was dismissed in 1992. In 1995, he filed another petition seeking return of his original documents and appointment; that petition was dismissed in 2001 after the Court noted that he had produced no evidence that the respondents held the originals and that the dispute could not be resolved in writ proceedings.

In 2018, he again sought a direction under Article 226 to consider his 3 April 2017 representation and return the documents.

The Court applied the principle that a matter already adjudicated on merits cannot be re-agitated in a subsequent proceeding between the parties.

It relied on the prior decision in W.P. No. 3424 of 1995, which had dismissed the claim after finding no material establishing that the original documents had been submitted and treating their custody as a disputed question of fact unsuitable for determination in writ proceedings.

The Court found that the petitioner’s current request concerned the same documents and substantially the same relief as his 1995 petition.

That earlier petition had already been dismissed after the Court considered the evidentiary deficiency and the disputed question of whether the respondents possessed the originals. Since the issue had already been addressed, the petitioner could not use a new representation and writ petition to re-agitate it.

It dismissed the present writ petition and granted no mandamus or other relief.