cw- 28/2007Hazi Gulam Rasul & Anr. Vs. Farid & Ors. Judgment dt.24.7.08 1/2 S.B. CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO.28/2007 Hazi Gulam Rasul & Anr. Vs. Farid & Ors. Date of order : 24th July, 2008 PRESENT HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE VINEET KOTHARI Mr. I.R. Choudhary for the petitioner. Mr. Mahendra Chudhary for the respondents. --------- 1. Heard learned counsels. 2. This writ petition is directed against the impugned order dated 30th July, 1997 allowing the application of the applicants Abdul Salam and others who are the respondents No.11 to 18 in the present writ petition impleading them as defendants. The petitioners had challenged this order before this Court by way of civil revision petition No.126/98 which came to be dismissed as not maintainable on 15.10.2003 in view of the judgment of Hon'ble Suprme Court in Shiv Shakti Cooperative Housing Society, Nagaur Vs. Swaraj Developers and others – 2003 (6) SCC 659 being against the interlocutory order. Hence, subsequently this writ petition was filed challenging the same order. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the respondents No.11 to 18 were not necessary or proper parties as they had no interest in the mine situated at plot No.204/1 in question and, therefore, the learned trial court had erred in impleading them as defendants and they could take remedy before the departmental authorities or by filing of separate suit in the Civil Court, Bhilwara if cw- 28/2007Hazi Gulam Rasul & Anr. Vs. Farid & Ors. Judgment dt.24.7.08 2/2 they were aggrieved by the grant of lease in favour of the plaintiffs. 4. On the side opposite Mr. Mahendra Choudhary, learned counsel appearing for respondents No.11 to 18 submits that these applicants claimed interest in the same plot of land No.204/1 on the basis of Bapi patta issued in favour of their ancestor Amrudin vide Annex.R/12-18/1 dated 4.7.1945. 5. A perusal of the said Bapi patta indicates that same was issued for plot No.204/1 issued in favour of the Amrudin on 4.7.1945 by the officer incharge of Mining Department, Makarana. The same does not prima facie appear to be a patta for any limited period. The plaintiff had filed the suit for declaration in respect of mine situated on the same plot No.204/1. In view of these rival claims between the parties, the respondents No.11 to 18 cannot be said to be strangers to the lis involved in the matter and, therefore, the learned trial court cannot be held to be committed any error in impleading them as defendants in the present suit. The present writ petition filed against the said order does not call for any interference. 6. The writ petition is devoid of merit. The same is accordingly dismissed. [ DR. VINEET KOTHARI ], J. item No.46 babulal/-