1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Civil Revision No.6912 of 2009 (O&M) Date of Decision : 26th November,2009 Ashok Kumar Joshi .....Petitioner Versus Shree Atma Anand Jain Sabha(Regd)Malerkotla & Ors. .....Respondents. CORAM: HON'BLE MRS.JUSTICE SABINA. Present: Mr.Puneet Jindal, Advocate for the petitioner. * * * Sabina,J.(Oral) Plaintiffs-respondents No.1 to 3 have filed a suit for declaration to the effect that the order dated 04.07.2008 passed by defendant no.1 was illegal, null and void. During the pendency of the suit, petitioner moved an application under Order 1, Rule 10 of the Code of Civil Procedure for being impleaded as a defendant. Vide the impugned order, the said application was dismissed by the trial court. Hence, the present revision petition. After hearing learned counsel for the petitioner, I am of the opinion that the instant petition is devoid of any merit and is liable to be dismissed. Petitioner has alleged that he was a necessary/proper party in the suit in question. Petitioner was working as a headmaster of the 2 school and wanted to support the impugned order passed by defendant no.1. Hence, petitioner was proper/necessary party to the suit. The impugned order reads as under:- "The tenure of Correspondent of S.S.Jain High School, Malerkotla District Sangror has been expired on 28.2.2008. For the distribution of salary of this school, till further orders the District Education Officer (S.S.)Sangrur is appointed as Correspondent." Thus, vide the impugned order, the District Education Officer was appointed as a correspondent for distribution of salary to the school as the earlier correspondent had died on 28.02.2008. Although there is pending litigation between the petitioner and respondents no.1 to 3, yet the said fact is no ground to hold that in the present suit also the petitioner is a necessary or a proper party. Petitioner is a headmaster of the school. Plaintiffs have challenged the order passed by defendant no.1(Annexure P-1) by filing the present suit. The validity of the said order is to be explained by defendant no.1. Petitioner is a stranger to the suit and hence, the learned trial court rightly held that the petitioner is neither necessary nor proper party. Para 8 of the plaint as reproduced in the grounds reads as under: "8. That there is about 600 boys getting education in the premises of S.A.Jain High School, Malerkotla which is Govt recognized aided school and due to constant interference of the defendant its atmosphere has been spoiled and the Teacher and Headmaster serving in its became autocrat and due to 3 their behaviour the strength of students have been marginally decreased and Headmaster of the School had to be suspended. An additional administrator was appointed in order to put the things in order in the school. This has happened at the instance of defendants and their illegal order which is under challenge before this Hon'ble Court." Merely, because an allegation has been made by the plaintiffs that the atmosphere had been spoiled by the teacher and the headmaster does not lead to the inference that the petitioner is a necessary or proper party in the suit. Hence, the impugned order does not suffer from any material irregularity or illegality which would warrant interference by this court in revision. Accordingly, this petition is dismissed. 26.11.2009 (SABINA) Seema-II Judge