Poonam Vs. State of U.P. & Ors
|
Head Note
Constitution of India, 1950 - Article 226
Writ Jurisdiction - Necessary Party - Locus standi - Shop no.2 had become vacant - Appellant was allotted the shop, may be in the handicapped quota - Such allotment is the resultant factor of the said shop falling vacant - Original allottee, that is the respondent, assailed his cancellation and ultimately succeeded in appeal -Appellant was allowed to put her stand in the appeal - She was neither a necessary nor a proper party - Appellate authority permitted her to participate but that neither changes the situation nor does it confer any legal status on her - She would have continued to hold the shop had the original allottee lost the appeal - She cannot assail the said order in a writ petition because she is not a necessary party - It is the State or its functionaries, who could have challenged the same in appeal - They have maintained sphinx like silence in that regard - That would not confer any locus on the subsequent allottee to challenge the order passed in favour of the former allottee - She is a third party to the lis in this context - Restoration of the legal right is pivotal and the prime mover - The eclipse being over, former allottee has to come back to the same position - His right gets revived and that revival of the right cannot be dented by the third party i.e. the appellant subsequent allottee.
The Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 - Order I Rule (9) , Constitution of India, 1950 - Article 226
Writ Jurisdiction - Necessary Party - Impleadment of Parties - Held that principle behind proviso to Order I Rule 9 that the Code of Civil Procedure enjoins it and the said principle is also applicable to the writs - An unsuccessful candidate challenging the selection as far as the service jurisprudence is concerned is bound to make the selected candidates parties.
The Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 - Order I Rule (9)
Necessary Party - Non-joinder - Held that in the absence of a necessary party, no adjudication can take place and, in fact, the non-joinder would be fatal to the case.
Topic(s)-Writ Jurisdiction - Necessary Party - Locus Standi - Petitioner not necessary party