Anti Corruption Movement, v. Dr.K.Karthikeyan,

W.M.P.No. 5205 of 2017 in W.P.No. 65 of 2017 BATTU DEVANAND, J.

Heard the implead petitioner and perused the averments in the affidavit filed along with the implead petition.

2. In view of the facts and circumstances of the case, as the charge memo was issued against the petitioner based on the complaint made by the implead petitioner and the grievance of the implead petitioner is that Pollution Control Board is not acting properly against the petitioner, in our considered view, it is appropriate to hear the implead petitioner also in this case, as necessary and proper party to this writ petition.

4. Accordingly, implead petition is allowed and the implead petitioner is impleaded as respondent No.3 in this writ petition.

22.02.2024 AT 1/2 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis