1 S.B.CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO. 2838/2009 (Roopa Ram Vs. State of Rajasthan & ors.) Date of order :: 22nd April 2009 HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE DINESH MAHESHWARI None present for the petitioner Though nobody appeared for the petitioner in the first round, the matter was passed over in the interest of justice. The matter has now been called out in second round after recess but nobody has yet chosen to appear for the petitioner. Having regard to the circumstances, the record has been examined. It is noticed that an application as moved by the petitioner purportedly under Order XXII Rule 10 CPC seeking impleadment in the pending appeal before the Board of Revenue has been declined by the impugned order dated 11.03.2008 particularly with reference to the fact that the petitioner allegedly purchased the suit property during the pendency of the litigation; and with reference to the decisions of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the cases of Sanjay Verma Vs. Manik Roy and others: AIR 2007 SC 1332 and Sunil Gupta Vs. Kiran Girhotra and others: (2007) 8 SCC 506. The Board of Revenue has observed that a transferee pendente lite is not to be impleaded a party and the application as moved by the petitioner was required to be rejected. There appears no error or illegality in the order as passed by the Board of Revenue and no case is made out for interference in the writ jurisdiction. The writ petition stands rejected. 2 (DINESH MAHESHWARI),J. MK