LAWS(MPH)-1993-7-25

DAULAT SINGH Vs. UNION OF INDIA

Decided On July 29, 1993
DAULAT SINGH Appellant
V/S
UNION OF INDIA Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) AS against this in M.B. Majumdar v. Union of India (AJR 1990 SC 2263) the Supreme Court had occasion to consider the question of equivalence of status of the Members/Vice -Chairman of the Tribunals vis -a -vis Judges of a High Court. Paragraph 8 of this Judgment is a complete answer to the argument that Members Vice -Chairman of the Tribunal have been held to be equivalent in status to that of the Judges of a High Court in Sampat Kumar's case (supra). We reproduce Paragraph No.8 hereunder : -

(2.) IT was further observed in Paragraph No.12 of the decision as under : -

(3.) ANOTHER case cited on the point is the decision of the Supreme Court in Gadde Venkateswara Rao v. Government of Andhara Pradesh and others (AIR 1966 SC 828). It was reiterated by the Supreme Court in this decision relying on Calcutta Gas company's case (supra), that a petitioner who seeks to file an application under Article 226 of the Constitution should "ordinarily" be one who has a personal or individual right in the subject matter of the petition. The decision itself observed that in exceptional cases, as the expression "ordinarily" indicates, a person who has been prejudicially affected by an Act or omission of an authority can file a writ petition even though he has no proprietary or even fiduciary interest in the subject matter thereof. This decision, therefore, also does not come in the way of the petitioners.