Back
IN THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM & ARUNACHAL PRADESH)
DEVASHIS BARUAH
State Of Assam – Appellant
Versus
Lakshi Kt Deka S/o Lt. Dehi Ram Deka – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. overview of review application and previous orders. (Para 1 , 2) |
| 2. arguments on non-joinder of necessary party. (Para 3 , 4) |
| 3. court's rationale on party representation and obligation. (Para 5 , 6) |
| 4. no grounds found for review of earlier order. (Para 7) |
| 5. concluding dismissal of the review petition. (Para 8) |
JUDGMENT :
DEVASHIS BARUAH, J.
Heard Mr. R. M. Das, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the review petitioners.
2. The present review application has been filed challenging the common order dated 27.09.2022 passed in WP(C) No.3783/2022 whereby the learned Coordinate Bench of this Court after hearing the learned counsel for the parties in the said writ petition along with the batch of connected writ petitions passed the following order:-
“(1) Within 15 (fifteen) days from today, the concerned official of the State Government of Assam will communicate the supplementary budget passed in the last Assembly Session pertaining to the scheme to the competent authority of the Ministry of Jal Shakti, Government of India.
(2) Within 60 (sixty) days from the date of receipt of such communication, the Ministry of Jal Shakti to release the amount due under the schemes to
A review petition cannot be entertained solely on grounds of non-joinder of necessary parties if the court previously heard all involved parties and issued a direction that must stand.
Procedural non-compliance by petitioners does not justify reviewing a court order, especially when all necessary parties were represented during the original proceedings.
A review petition challenging an order for lack of a party's joinder is unwarranted if the represented party did not raise any objections during the hearing; petitioners bear the responsibility to im....
Non-joinder of a necessary party does not invalidate a court's order where the party was represented and did not contest its involvement; petitioners are responsible for including all relevant partie....
Procedural failures by petitioners do not justify a court order review, especially when necessary parties were represented and did not object.
The court ruled that the obligation to join all necessary parties lies with the petitioners, and failure to do so does not warrant the review of an order.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
