Bombay High Court: Constructive Res Judicata Bars Repeated Writ Challenges Under Article 226

The Bombay High Court has held that the doctrine of constructive res judicata applies even to writ petitions filed under Article 226 of the Constitution, preventing litigants from repeatedly raising issues that were already decided or could have been raised in earlier proceedings.

A Division Bench of Justice G.S. Kulkarni and Justice Aarti Sathe dismissed a writ petition filed by Bharat Petroleum Corporation Limited (BPCL), which challenged the levy and recovery of octroi/export fee imposed by the Manmad Municipal Council on petroleum products transported through the municipal area.

The dispute arose from a demand notice issued in 2008 seeking approximately ₹23.37 crore towards octroi and export fee for the period between 1998 and 2008. BPCL argued that its oil depot was located outside municipal limits and therefore the Council lacked authority to levy the fee.

However, the Court noted that BPCL had already approached the High Court on three previous occasions concerning the same levy. In an earlier proceeding, the Court had upheld the validity of the export fee after finding a clear nexus between the municipal services provided and the fee collected.

Rejecting the fresh challenge, the Bench observed that judicial decisions must attain finality and parties cannot continuously re-agitate issues that were or ought to have been raised earlier. The Court emphasized that constructive res judicata is founded on public policy and applies equally to writ jurisdiction.

Holding that BPCL was attempting to reassert rights already adjudicated, the Court dismissed the petition while permitting the Municipal Council to withdraw and adjust amounts deposited before the Court towards outstanding dues.