jpc wp9896&9897-09.sxw 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO. 9896 OF 2009 Vijay Bankatsing Rajput ... Petitioner Versus The State of Maharashtra and others ... Respondents WITH CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO. 9897 OF 2009 Mukund Bhalchandra Unde ... Petitioner Versus The State of Maharashtra and others ... Respondents Mr. S. S. Kanetkar for the petitioners in both the petitions Mr. A. B. Vagyani a/w Mr. Manoj J. Patil for Respondent No.4 in both the petitions Mr. S. D. Rayrikar, AGP for Respondent Nos. 1 to 3 in both the petitions. CORAM: R. M. SAVANT, J. DATED : 24th November, 2011 P.C. : 1. The above petitions take exception to the identical orders, both dated 6th October, 2009 passed by the learned 9th Joint Civil Judge, Senior Division, Pune by which the application Exh.35 filed in Regular Civil Suit No. 493 of 2009 and Regular Civil Suit No. jpc wp9896&9897-09.sxw 2 494 of 2009 came to be allowed and the applicant i.e. Chanakya Sahakari Gruharachana Sanstha Ltd. was directed to be impleaded as party defendant to the said suits. The direction was issued on the basis that the land on which the building wherein the flats in question are situated was allotted to the said society and it is on account of breach of the conditions mentioned in the allotment letter dated 31st March, 1995 that action has been taken by State Government against the society, that the impleadment has been sought. 2. The above suits in question have been filed by the plaintiffs i.e. the petitioners herein challenging the notices issued by the State Government i.e the Collector to each of the petitioners as to why the possession of the flats in question should not be taken from the petitioners. As indicated above, the land, on which the building wherein the flats in question are satiated, was allotted by the State Government to the society and cause for giving notice was on account of breach of the terms and conditions of the allotment. In the background of the aforestated facts, the society, if not a necessary party, is atleast a proper jpc wp9896&9897-09.sxw 3 party for being impleaded in the said suits. 4. It is required to be noted that the order has been passed as long as back on 6th October, 2009 and in view of the above petitions, the suits in question have not progressed. Having considered the reasons mentioned by the trial Court for allowing the said application Exh.35 for impleadment of the society, in my view considering the scope of Order 1 Rule 10 of the Code of Civil Procedure, no fault can be found with the said order. No case for interdiction is made out. The Writ Petitions are accordingly dismissed. However, the hearing of the suits is expedited. (R. M. SAVANT, J.)