TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2014 (4) TMI 1294
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....hary, Adv., Mr. Ugra Shankar Prasad, Adv, Mr. Gopal Singh, Adv. For the Respondent : Ms. Kumud Lata Das, Adv, Mr. Abhijit Sengupta, Adv, Mr. Ratan Kumar Choudhuri, Adv, Mr. B. Krishna Prasad. JUDGMENT DIPAK MISRA, J. 1. In these appeals, assail is to the judgment and order dated 19.9.2003 passed by the High Court of Judicature at Patna in a batch of letters patent appeals whereby the Division Bench has concurred with the opinion expressed by the learned Single Judge wherein he had quashed the appointment of a number of appointees in respect of the post, namely, Medical Laboratory Technician (MLT) on the ground that the procedure adopted for selection was vitiated as the candidates were selected only by interview without holding any wri....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ondents before the High Court and hardly a few appointees filed applications for intervention. It is well settled in law that no adverse order can be passed against persons who were not made parties to the litigation. In this context, we may refer with profit to the authority in Prabodh Verma and Ors. v. State of Uttar Pradesh and Ors. (1984) 4 SCC 251, wherein a three-Judge Bench was dealing with the constitutional validity of two Uttar Pradesh Ordinances which had been struck down by the Division Bench of the Allahabad High Court on the ground that the provisions therein were violative of Articles 14 and 16(1) of the Constitution of India. In that context, a question arose whether the termination of the services of the Appellants and the ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....n for non-joinder of necessary parties. 5. In the case at hand neither any rule nor Regulation was challenged. In fact, we have been apprised that at the time of selection and appointment there was no rule or Regulation. A procedure used to be adopted by the administrative instructions. That apart, it was not a large body of appointees but only 182 appointees. Quite apart from that the persons who were impleaded, were not treated to be in the representative capacity. In this regard, it is profitable to refer to some authorities. In Indu Shekhar Singh and Ors. v. State of U.P. and Ors. (2006) 8 SCC 129 it has been held thus: There is another aspect of the matter. The Appellants herein were not joined as parties in the writ petition filed ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....963 SC 786, wherein the Court has explained the distinction between necessary party, proper party and proforma party and further held that if a person who is likely to suffer from the order of the court and has not been impleaded as a party has a right to ignore the said order as it has been passed in violation of the principles of natural justice. More so, proviso to Order 1 Rule 9 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (hereinafter called 'Code of Civil Procedure') provides that non-joinder of necessary party be fatal. Undoubtedly, provisions of Code of Civil Procedure are not applicable in writ jurisdiction by virtue of the provision of Section 141 Code of Civil Procedure but the principles enshrined therein are applicable. (Vide G....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ajasthan v. Ucchab Lal Chhanwal (2014) 1 SCC 144, it has been opined that: Despite the indefatigable effort, we are not persuaded to accept the aforesaid preponement, for once the Respondents are promoted, the juniors who have been promoted earlier would become juniors in the promotional cadre, and they being not arrayed as parties in the lis, an adverse order cannot be passed against them as that would go against the basic tenet of the principles of natural justice. 12. In view of the aforesaid enunciation of law, we are disposed to think that in such a case when all the appointees were not impleaded, the writ petition was defective and hence, no relief could have been granted to the writ Petitioners. 13. The next submission which has ....