FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET NO. IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE, BENCH AT AURANGABAD WRIT PETITION NO.1288 OF 1991 ________________________________________________________ Office Notes, Office | Memoranda of Coram, | Court's or Judge's orders appearances, Court's | orders or directions | and Registrar's orders | ________________________________________________________ This writ petition takes exception to the order dated 30th March, 1991 passed by the Joint C.J.J.D., Latur below Exh.17 in RCS No.532 of 1990. 2 The learned Counsel for the petitioners invited my attention to the impugned judgment and order and submitted that mere perusal of the cause title of the RCS NO. 532/1990 would show that the present petitioners were not parties before the Joint C.J.J.D., Latur and in spite of that the impugned judgment and order came to be passed on 30th March, 1991 holding the petitioners guilty for having committed breach and disobedience of the order passed on 4.8.1990. 3 The sum and substance of the arguments advanced by the learned Counsel for the petitioners is that since the petitioners were not parties before the Court below and the impugned judgment and order was passed by the Court below without hearing the petitioners or even without issuing any notice, the impugned judgment and order is not sustainable in law. 4 After perusal of the cause title of the RCS No.532/1990, which was decided by the C.J.J.D., Latur on 30th March, 1991 would show that only the Chief Officer of the Municipal Council, Latur was party – respondent to the said R.C.S. and the petitioners were not parties to the said civil suit. It is surprising to note as to how the impugned judgment and order was passed by the Court below in absence of the petitioners being parties. It is not necessary to refer to any particular judgment since by this time, it is well established that if the concerned person is not party – respondent to the proceedings, no any effective order can be passed against such person. In the instant case, the petition is required to be allowed merely on the ground that the petitioners were not made parties before the Court below while passing the impugned judgment and order. Even, no notice was served on them and they were not heard. 5 Hence, the impugned judgment and order dated 30th March, 1991 passed by the Joint C.J.J.D., Latur below Exh.17 in RCS No.532 of 1990 is quashed and set aside. Rule is made absolute in terms of prayer clause (B). Petition is allowed and disposed of with no order as to costs. (S.S. SHINDE, J.) 05.01.2010. PLK/*