Summary
The High Court rejected interim protection in a land-related writ petition solely because the land was vacant. The Supreme Court found that reason inadequate to the controversy, set aside the order and remanded for fresh consideration of interim relief or disposal of the writ petition in accordance with law.
Issues
- Whether the High Court adequately justified rejection of interim relief by stating only that the land was vacant.
Held
- An order granting or refusing interim relief must give justifiable reasons responsive to the facts, applicable law and nature of the controversy. The single reason that the land was vacant did not adequately justify refusal in this case. (¶¶ 5, 8, 9)
- The High Court was to reconsider interim relief afresh or consider disposal of the writ petition itself. The Supreme Court left the merits for independent determination on remand. (¶¶ 7, 10)
Result
Appeal allowed; the interim refusal was set aside and the matter remanded to the High Court for fresh decision on merits in accordance with law.