Locus standi to challenge limited suo motu relief fails where the party's own appeal and revision are not maintainable.

A party whose appeal becomes ineffective for non-payment and whose revision is dismissed as time-barred cannot challenge the scope of discretionary suo motu relief later granted by the revisional authority. The further relief was treated as a concession, not an enforceable entitlement, so no justiciable grievance survived and the applicants lacked locus standi to seek enlargement of that relief. The application was therefore dismissed.

---

---

Issues: Whether the applicants, whose appeal had failed for non-payment of the required part payment and whose revision was dismissed as time-barred, could challenge the extent of relief granted by the revisional authority on suo motu grounds.

Analysis: The applicants had allowed their appeal to become ineffective by not making the required payment, and their revision application had also been dismissed on limitation. The revisional authority's further relief was treated as having been granted only on a suo motu basis and, therefore, as a concession. In these circumstances, the applicants had no standing to complain that the relief did not extend further.

Conclusion: The applicants had no locus standi to seek enlargement of the suo motu relief granted by the revisional authority.

Final Conclusion: The application was dismissed because no justiciable grievance survived after the appeal and revision had failed on procedural grounds, and the limited relief granted suo motu could not be questioned by the applicants.

Ratio Decidendi: A party whose own appeal or revision is not maintainable cannot complain that a discretionary suo motu concession granted by the authority did not go far enough.

---