ALIMUL ISLAM KHAN Vs. SOHANLAL MANPURIA & ORS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Although there is no specific direction given by this Court, the respondent nos.1 & 2, being the writ petitioners, have prepared a set of informal paper books, which may be taken on record.

(2.) During the course of hearing of the matter, it appears that initially after the writ petition was filed, there was an order passed on 6th Feb., 2012, wherein the submission made on behalf of the respondent nos.2 & 3, namely, West Bengal Transport Infrastructure Development Corporation Limited, was recorded to the effect that the bus operators in the concerned region had not been made party respondents and as such, the writ petition was not maintainable. It was on the basis of such submission that the learned Single Judge on 6th Feb., 2012, had issued a direction for the bus operators to be added as party respondents and for amendment of the cause-title of the writ petition. Consequently, on 2nd March, 2012, another order was passed by the learned Single Judge whereby leave was granted to the writ petitioners to pen down the names of the added respondents nos.11 to 27 in the writ petition, who appeared to be the bus operators.

(3.) Since it is palpably evident that the appellant before us is also a bus operator as well as the Secretary of SD-16, Bus Owner's Association, we are of the view that without impleading the appellant as party to the writ petition, the impugned judgment and order could not have been passed by the learned Single Judge. The judgment referred to and relied upon by the learned advocate appearing on behalf of the respondent nos.1 & 2, namely the writ petitioners, in the case of Sand Carrier s Owners Union & Ors. Vs. Board of Trustees for the Port of Calcutta & Ors., 1989 2 CalLJ 201, has no manner of application at all in the facts and circumstances of the instant case, as the said case was primarily decided on the basis of the writ petitioners (unincorporated associations) not having suffered any prejudice in the facts of that decision.