1 SB Civil Writ Petition No.67/2009 Raju. vs. Hans Raj & Ors. S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.67/2009 Raju. vs. Hans Raj and others. Date : 9.1.2009 HON'BLE MR. PRAKASH TATIA, J. Mr.GJ Gupta, for the petitioner. - - - - - Heard learned counsel for the petitioner. Learned counsel for the petitioner/applicant submits that the plaintiff filed suit for injunction against the Municipal Board, Kesrisinghpur and in the suit, ad-interim injunction has been granted against construction of the road. The petitioner/applicant who is resident near the proposed construction of road and since last about 4 months, the injunction order is in force, therefore, he submitted an application for being impleaded as party in the suit. According to learned counsel for the petitioner/applicant, the petitioner is facing great hardship and along with the petitioner, 2 SB Civil Writ Petition No.67/2009 Raju. vs. Hans Raj & Ors. other residents are also facing great hardship because of the fact that the building material is lying on the road. Since it is a matter relating to public convenience, therefore, it was the duty of the trial court to have decided the injunction application in accordance with law expeditiously and the trial court should not have kept the injunction application pending for such a long period. The petitioner who may be resident and may be suffering more but so far as the merits of the case is concerned, in that Municipal Board is required to contest the suit who has all the evidence with itself. In view of the above reason, the trial court is directed to decide the injunction application expeditiously preferably within a period of 30 days from the receipt of the copy of the order. So far as impleading of the petitioner in the suit as party is concerned, I do not find any reason to implead the petitioner as party. 3 SB Civil Writ Petition No.67/2009 Raju. vs. Hans Raj & Ors. Consequently, this writ petition is hereby dismissed with direction to the trial court as above. (PRAKASH TATIA), J. S.Phophaliya