Ravindra Shrotiya S/O Shri ... vs Ramdutt Sharma S/O Late Shri ...
2021 Latest Caselaw 3688 Raj/2

      HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN
                  BENCH AT JAIPUR

              S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 8661/2021

1.     Ravindra     Shrotiya      S/o     Shri     Ramnath       Shrotiya,   R/o
       Kayasthpada, District Dholpur (Raj.).
2.     Teerath Singh @ Lalji S/o Shri Yogendra Singh, R/o
       Kayasthpada, District Dholpur (Raj.).
3.     Rajendra Singh S/o Shri Pratap Singh, R/o Kayasthpada,
       District Dholpur (Raj.).
4.     Narendra Singh Tomar S/o Late Sundar Tomar, R/o
       Kayasthpada, District Dholpur (Raj.).
                                                                  ----Petitioners
                                   Versus
1.     Ramdutt Sharma S/o Late Shri Ramdayal Sharma, R/o
       Kayasthpada, District Dholpur (Raj.).
2.     Smt. Meena Kumari Sharma D/o Late Smt. Dropadi Devi
       W/o Shri Munna Lal Sharma, R/o Kayasthpada, Dist.-
       Dholpur
3.     Municipal    Council,       Through        Municipal      Commissioner,
       Dholpur(Raj.).
4.     Municipal Council, Through Chairman, Municipal Council,
       Dholpur(Raj.).
5.     State Of Rajasthan, Through Dist. Collector, District
       Dholpur (Raj.).
                                                                ----Respondents

For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Aditya Mishra with Mr. Devkrishna Purohit For Respondent(s) :

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA

Order

13/08/2021 Learned counsel for the petitioners assails the order dated

01.02.2021 whereby an application moved by the petitioners

under Order 1 Rule 10 CPC was rejected. Learned counsel submits

(2 of 2) [CW-8661/2021]

that the petitioners are the complainants, on the basis of which

the proceedings were initiated as against the complainants who

are necessary party to the case. The law relating to necessary and

appropriate party has been laid down by the Supreme Court

initially in the case of Udit Narain Singh Malpaharia Vs.

Additional Member, Board of Revenue, Bihar, AIR 1963 SC

786 wherein the Supreme Court has held as under:-

"(12) To summarise in a writ of certiorari not only the Tribunal or authority whose order is sought to be quashed but also parties in whose favour the said order is issued are necessary parties. But it is in the discretion of the Court add or implead proper parties for completely settling all the questions that may be involved in the controversy either suo motu or on the application of a party to the writ or an application filed add instance of such proper party."

The said law has been further settled by this Court in catena

of judgment as noticed by the trial Court namely Deepika

Paliwal Vs. Civil Judge (Jr. Div.), Rajsamand, reported in

2017(2) WLC (Raj.) U.C. 165 and Babulal Vs. Hemraj

reported in 2018(1) WLC (Raj.) U.C. 127 to satisfy that the

complainant does not have a locus nor/or is necessary a party or

an appropriate in proceedings initiated as against or the

complainant by the Municipal Council.

Keeping in view thereof, the writ is misconceived and the

same is accordingly dismissed.

(SANJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA),J

Arun/54

Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)