Bombay High CourtWP/1155/2019dismissedrule discharged

Manohar S/O Tatobaji Bawankule And Others v. Sarpanch, Gram Panchayat, Murmadi (Tupkar) Lakhani, Bhandara And Others

2019-02-15Hon'Ble Shri Justice Z.A. Haq2 pages

1 27wp1155.19

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

NAGPUR BENCH : NAGPUR WRIT PETITION NO. 1155/2019 Mr Manohar s/o Tatobaji Bawankule and others. ..VS..

Sarpanch, Gram Panchayat Muramadi (Tupkar), Dist. Bhandara and others. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, Court's or Judge's orders appearances, Court's orders of directions and Registrar's orders - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Shri Sumedh Kadam, advocate h/f Shri R.R. Vyas, advocate for the petitioners.

CORAM : Z.A.HAQ, J.

DATED : 15/02/2019 Heard.

The civil suit is filed by the petitioners praying for decree for permanent injunction restraining the original defendant Nos. 1 and 2 i.e. Sarpanch of the Gram Panchayat and Secretary of the Gram Panchayat from taking over possession of the rooms of the suit property. The present respondent No. 3-Assistant Project Officer, the Respondent No.4- Project Director and the Respondent No.5-Chief Executive Officer/Chairman, had filed application seeking directions to the plaintiffs to implead them as the defendants in the civil suit. This application is decided by the impugned order. The learned trial Judge has directed the plaintiffs to implead the present respondent Nos. 3, 4 and 5 as the defendants in the civil suit. The learned trial Judge has observed that the proposed defendants have been actively

2 27wp1155.19 involved in the allotment of the suit properties, and their presence would assist the Court in deciding the matter properly and finally.

Considering the facts of the case, it cannot be said that the learned trial Judge has committed any error of jurisdiction by allowing the application filed by the respondent Nos. 3, 4 and 5.

I see no reason to interfere with the impugned order.

The writ petition is dismissed. No costs.

JUDGE rkn