VIJAYAN Vs. COMMR CORPORATION OF COCHIN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This Civil Miscellaneous Petition has been filed by a stranger. He prays that he may be impleaded as one of the petitioners in the Original Petition. The prayer in the Original Petition filed under Art.226 of the Constitution of India it for a writ of mandamus directing the Commissioner, Corporation of Cochin and the Director of Municipal Administration (who are the respondents) to absorb the three petitioners as permanent Syranks in Vypeen Ferry Service under the Corporation of Cochin. The person who filed the present CMP. wants to get in as the fourth petitioner. The application is opposed mainly on the ground that the applicant has no right to get himself added to as one of the petitioners.

(2.) The application has been filed purportedly under R.147A of the Rules of the High Court of Kerala, 1971 (for short the High Court Rules). R.147A is extracted below:

(3.) A reading of the rule shows that it is meant to be observed at the time of filing the Original Petition. The words "more persons than one may join in one writ petition as petitioners" are indicative of the joint action to be exercised by more than one person while filing the Original Petition. The interpretation that the rule enables a stranger to get himself added to as one of the petitioners after the filing of the Original Petition does not appear to be sound on the language employed in the rule. There is no provision in the High Court Rules similar to O.1 R.10(2) of the Code of Civil Procedure as per which the Civil Court has power to add "the name of any person who ought to have been joined, whether as plaintiff or defendant." Absence of a similar provision in the High Court Rules is of no practical consequence for any other person since it is open to him to file a separate Original Petition for reliefs which he claims.