← Library
Madras High CourtWMP/33759/2016allowed

K.Balasubrmanian, v. K.C.Raghu

2021-11-17Honourable Mr Justice R. Suresh Kumar2 pages

W. M. P. N o.3 3 7 5 9 of 2016 in W.P.N o.1 90 4 6 of 2016 W.M.P.No.33759 of 2016 in W.P.No.19046 of 2016 R. SURESH KUMAR, J.

This petition has been filed to implead the present petitioner as one of the respondents in the main writ petition.

2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner, who would submit that, the petitioner is an interested party in the issue raised in the main writ petition as the temple is the community temple and petitioner belongs to the said community and already the petitioner had approached this Court in W.P.No.4713 of 2015 with regard to the action to be taken against the writ petitioner and according to the learned counsel, in that writ petition alone it has been progressed to take action against the writ petitioner and ultimately it has ended up with the present impugned order. Therefore, the petitioner is a necessary party to be heard.

3. However, Mr.N.Manokaran, learned counsel for the respondent / writ petitioner, by relying upon the counter affidavit filed by the writ petitioner / first respondent herein, would contend that the present issue raised in the main writ petition is as to whether the Executive Officer already appointed to serve along with the petitioner as hereditary trustee to continue to act beyond the six months period as per the impugned order, is the only question for which the present petitioner who seeks impleadment has nothing to do with. Hence, the said plea of impleadment can be rejected as he is opposing the same, he contended. https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

W. M. P. N o.3 3 7 5 9 of 2016 in W.P.N o.1 90 4 6 of 2016 R.SURESH KUMAR, J.

KST

4. The petitioner herein is not a stranger to the issue raised in the main writ petition in view of the averments filed in support of this petition and moreover, in order to have a complete and effective adjudication in the main writ petition, this Court feels that the presence of the present petitioner as one of the party respondent in the main writ petition is necessary.

5. Therefore, this Court is of the view that this petition can be allowed and accordingly it is allowed. Registry is directed to carry out the necessary amendment in the cause title and post the main writ petition for hearing on 25.11.2021. 17.11.2021 KST W.M.P.No.33759 of 2016 in W.P.No.19046 of 2016 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis