A.S. IMPEX Vs. DURGA TRADERS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard on I.A. No.1 of 2019, an application seeking permission to file the appeal.

(2.) Learned Senior Counsel for the appellant submitted that the appellant is the person aggrieved by the ad-interim order dated 24.10.2019 passed by the learned single Judge in W.P. Nos.114748-114750 of 2019 and therefore, the appellant ought to have been impleaded. However, the learned single Judge, in the absences of the appellant and, without realising the fact that the writ petition suffers from the vice of non-joinder of necessary parties, has passed the interim order restraining the respondents from registering the sales contract for import of Poppy seeds from China pursuant to the public notice dated 04.10.2019. It is submitted that the respondent No.1 himself has annexed the list of persons whose applications for registration were pending pursuant to the impugned advertisement and therefore, in all fairness, the respondent No.1 should have impleaded the aforesaid persons as the interim order operates to the prejudice of the appellant.

(3.) Resisting the aforesaid submission made by learned Senior Counsel for the appellant, learned counsel for the respondent No.1 has invited the attention of this Court to a Division Bench decision of this Court in Jestmal Vs. Deputy Commissioner, Bengaluru, and has submitted that a person, who is not a party to a writ petition, cannot file an appeal against the order passed in the writ petition and therefore, the appellant has no locus to challenge the ad interim order passed by the learned single Judge.