U.N. Saxena v. UOI & Ors.

Delhi High Court · 14 Nov 2024 · 2024:DHC:8858-DB
C. Hari Shankar; Tushar Rao Gedela
W.P.(C) 5341/2007
2024:DHC:8858-DB
administrative appeal_dismissed

AI Summary

The Delhi High Court dismissed the writ petition for non-joinder of necessary parties, holding that persons whose promotion is challenged must be impleaded in the original application before the Tribunal.

Full Text
Translation output
W.P.(C) 5341/2007
HIGH COURT OF DELHI
W.P.(C) 5341/2007
U.N.SAXENA .....Petitioner
Through: Ms. Meenu Mainee and Mr. Sahil Chopra, Advs.
VERSUS
UOI & ORS. ....Respondents
Through: Mr. Sushil Raaja, Sr. PC for UOI
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE C. HARI SHANKAR
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE TUSHAR RAO GEDELA
JUDGMENT
(ORAL)
14.11.2024 C. HARI SHANKAR, J.

1. Without going into the merits of the impugned order, we are of the opinion that OA 1887/2005, filed by the petitioner before the Central Administrative Tribunal[1] was itself liable to be dismissed on the ground of non-joinder of affected parties as the challenge in the OA was to the promotion of S.C. Sharma and Lakhan Lal Gupta as Chief Pharmacist-I and Chief Pharmacist-II in the North Central Railway and neither of them have been impleaded as parties.

2. For the proposition that persons whose promotion are under challenge have necessarily to be impleaded as parties, one may refer “the Tribunal”, hereinafter W.P.(C) 5341/2007 to All India SC & ST Employees Association v A. Arthur Jeen[2], Prabodh Verma v State of UP[3] and A.M.S. Sushanth v M. Sujatha[4].

3. For reasons other than those mentioned in the impugned judgment, therefore, we find that the OA was liable to be dismissed on the ground of non-joinder of necessary parties.

4. At this distance of time, this defect cannot be remedied.

5. Accordingly, we do not propose to interfere in this writ petition which is also, therefore, dismissed.

C. HARI SHANKAR, J.