Krishna Kumari v. State Of Punjab And Another
!"# "
"$%&'("&) * '
+ + ,- *.
$,/0$-
+++11&22$ % 3&-*/* %$%&'(/ 4$5$ 6$ '%.&- +++&*1'
6& %* 7!8+
!
"
! "
$
"
!
%
%
!
& "
% , "
%!! - $
, "
%!! , "
%!! " '**.
$
!
/
& $
)0 )+ '**.
&! $
)0 )+ '**.
$
, "
%!!
& $
, "
%!!
, "
%!!
1 !"
!
!
!"
!
"
! "
)+ )' .)))
!
''
, %&111 3 4'*+2 56
$
&
" '**. "
"
! ,
). )+ '**.
7
)+ )' .))) !
!
$
.2 ). .))'
)+ )' .))) 8
''36
!
!
7
& ''
4''
: !!
&$ ! !!
! ! !
"
/ $ ! !!
!
! $& 36
!!
!
!!
$
!!
!
;
36
1 !!
!
!
!!
"
$ ! ;
36 1 !!
!
"
!!
$
"
$
!;
! !!
" !!
<
&''
$
&$
! "
$ $ !
$"
! $ !
!" "
$
!
&''
! &! "
&
$
1 !"
!" 1
& $ 1
&!
&
$ $
= $ !
!
$ "
1 $
85 ! 1
! " #$%
.+ )( .)))
!"
"
"
& 4It appears that the High Court totally lost sight of the fact that in his petitions filed from time to time Brij Bihari Prasad Singh had not impleaded any of his seniors as partyrespondents. In the absence of persons likely to be affected by the relief prayed for, the writ petitions should have normally been dismissed unless there existed specific reasons for non impleadment of the affected persons. Neither any reason was assigned by the writ petitioner nor the court felt it necessary to deal with this aspect of the matter. Ignoring such a basic principle of law has resulted in the supersession of 168 Inspectors and 407 Dy.SPs. The writ petition filed by Brij Bihari Prasad Singh being totally misconceived, devoid of any legal force and prayers made being in contravention of the rules applicable in the case deserved dismissal, which was unfortunately not done with the result that the interests of many seniors have been threatened, endangered and adversely affected. The appeal of the State has, therefore, to be allowed by setting aside the impugned judgment.
! $ "
"
! $9: ; <