SHAMIM AHMED SHAMIM Vs. CUSTODIAN EVACUEE PROPERTY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is an application for leave to amend the writ petition. The petitioner seeks the impleadment of Shiekh Mohd. Abdullah, the Chief Minister of the State as a respondent in the writ petition. It is averred in the petition that after the petition was filed and the judgment in the I. P. A. was announced the respondent i.e. the Custodian Evacuee property has taken certain steps which have materially changed the situation. The happenings of the subsequent events has necessitated the addition and elucidation of some more facts which were not known to the petitioner at the time of the filing of the petition. The petitioner is in possession of evidence to prove that the impugned order was activated under the pressure and influence of the Chief Minister of the State whose animosity towards the petitioner is the actual reason for the respondents hostile and discriminatory behaviour towards the petitioner.

(2.) THE application has been resisted by the respondent. In his objections filed through his counsel he has categorically denied the allegations made in the application. It is submitted that there is no ground to justify the permission sought for amending the writ petition. As a matter of fact, the petition was filed as early as on 24 -11 -1978. Even after passing of the order by the Supreme Court for special leave on 9 -1 -1279 the petitioner did not take any steps to amend the writ petition till all this time which makes it evident that the intention of the petitioner is to prolong the proceedings. In accordance with the directions of the Supreme Court the writ petition is to be disposed of as expeditiously as possible. By asking the impleadment of the Chief Minister in the writ petition, the petitioner wants to malign him and indulge in political black mail. The order of eviction has been passed by respondent No. as an independent statutory authority. The Chief Minister has nothing to do with this matter. It is completely denied that the impugned order was passed and its execution was carried into effect at the instance and under the instructions of the Chief Minister of the State. This aspect of the matter has been clear in the counter -affidavit filed by the respondent in the writ petition The allegations made in the memorandum of amended petition are altogether irrelevant and have got no bearing on the merits of the case.

(3.) WE have heard the learned counsel for the parties at length and have also persued the memorandum of amendment, explanations and elucidations sought for.