Back
2020 Supreme(Ker) 60
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
S. MANIKUMAR, SHAJI P. CHALY, JJ.
Kerala State Legal Services Authority – Petitioner
Versus
The Court on its Motion Suo Motu Proceedings Initiated Based on the Letter Submitted by the Students of St. Fathima High School, Mlamala, Idukki – Respondent
I.A. No. 1 of 2020, W.P. (C) No. 30836 of 2019
Decided On : 24-01-2020
Advocate Appeared:
Santhosh Mathew, Unnikrishnan V. Alapatt, Arun Thomas, Jennis Stephen, Vijay V. Paul.
IMPORTANT POINTS:
Some of the suo motu writ petitions, assistance from the Kerala Legal Services Authority has been taken-Some of the issues raised by the students of the Fathima High School, Mlamala, Idukki are, about condition of bridges, provision for basic amenities, high expenses for treatment, poor transportation facilities and other things.
Headnote:
Code of Civil Procedure - Order II Rule 2 - The High Court Rules- Rule 152 - The procedure contemplated in the Code of Civil Procedure can be made applicable to the writ proceedings wherever permissible. Order II Rule 2 of the Code of Civil Procedure deals with the power of the Court to strike out or add parties-Considering the nature of the works undertaken by the Legal Services Authority on the decisions of the Hon'ble Supreme Court and High Court periodically and the public awareness created by the Legal Services Authority, the Kerala State Legal Services Authority is an appropriate authority to be heard in the writ petition and it will not be impleaded as a party respondent.
Statement of facts:
Kerala State Legal Services Authority, represented by its Member Secretary, has filed I.A.1/2019 for getting itself impleaded as additional respondent No.8 in the Writ Petition, under Rule 120 of the High Court Rules. Along with the application, he has produced Exts.R6(1) to R6(5) reports and Ext.R6(6) series of photographs. This writ petition is, based on the suo motu proceedings initiated upon a letter submitted by the students of St. Fathima High School, Mlamala, Idukki district, addressed to a learned Judge of this Court- some of the issues raised by the students of the Fathima High School, Mlamala, Idukki are, about condition of bridges, provision for basic amenities, high expenses for treatment, poor transportation facilities and other things.
Finding of the court:
Considering the nature of the works undertaken by the Legal Services Authority on the decisions of the Hon'ble Supreme Court and High Court periodically and the public awareness created by the Legal Services Authority-The Kerala State Legal Services Authority has to be heard in this matter. It is an appropriate authority to be heard in the writ petition and it will not be impleaded as a party respondent-The Kerala State Legal Services Authority would be heard in this proceedings- Reports and statements shall be filed by the authority with supporting documents. Respondents to file affidavit and documents.
Result: Directed
Case Summary
Background and Facts
The Kerala State Legal Services Authority (KSLSA) filed I.A. No. 1/2019 seeking to be impleaded as the 8th respondent in a suo motu writ petition (W.P. (C) No. 30836 of 2019) initiated based on a letter from students of St. Fathima High School, Mlamala, Idukki, highlighting issues such as poor bridge conditions, lack of basic amenities, high treatment costs, inadequate transportation, and related concerns. (!) [15000483280001][15000483280004]
KSLSA submitted reports (Exts.R6(1) to R6(5)) and photographs (Ext.R6(6) series). Post-registration of the writ, KSLSA requested details from the District Collector, Idukki, who provided reports from local panchayats.[15000483280001]
The Government Pleader opposed impleadment, arguing KSLSA lacked jurisdiction to intervene or call for details, as it was neither a necessary nor proper party.[15000483280002]
Legal Provisions Considered
- Code of Civil Procedure (CPC), Order II Rule 2: Empowers courts to add or strike out parties at any stage to enable effective and complete adjudication of all issues in the litigation.[15000483280003]
- High Court Rules, Rule 120: Invoked by KSLSA for impleadment application. (!)
- High Court Rules, Rule 152: Allows the court to issue notice to non-parties and hear any proper person at the admission stage or later, subject to conditions like costs. (!) (!)
CPC procedures apply to writ proceedings where permissible.[15000483280003]
Court's Analysis and Findings
The court recognized KSLSA's role in undertaking works based on Supreme Court and High Court directives, including public awareness initiatives, making it an appropriate authority whose input was valuable given the public interest issues involved.[15000483280004][15000483280006]
However, impleadment as a party respondent was not warranted, as KSLSA was not a necessary party under Order II Rule 2, CPC, for complete adjudication.[15000483280003][15000483280006]
Instead, KSLSA was permitted to be heard as a third party under Rule 152 of the High Court Rules.[15000483280006][15000483280007]
Directions and Outcome
- Impleading application dismissed.[15000483280007]
- KSLSA to be heard in the proceedings; required to file reports, statements, and supporting documents.[15000483280007]
- Respondents directed to file affidavits and documents.[15000483280007]
- Registry to list counsel for KSLSA at the next hearing.[15000483280008]
Result: Impleadment denied; hearing permitted.[15000483280007]
ORDER :
1. Kerala State Legal Services Authority, represented by its Member Secretary, has filed I.A. No. 1/2019 for getting itself impleaded as additional respondent No. 8 in the Writ Petition, under Rule 120 of the High Court Rules. Along with the application, he has produced Exts.R6(1) to R6(5) reports and Ext.R6(6) series of photographs. This writ petition is, based on the suo motu proceedings initiated upon a letter submitted by the students of St. Fathima High School, Mlamala, Idukki district, addressed to a learned Judge of this Court.
2. Inviting attention of this Court to the report of the District Collector, Idukki, addressed to the Member Secretary, Kerala State Legal Services Authority, learned Government Pleader submitted that, after the registration of suo motu public interest writ petition by this Court, Member Secretary, Kerala State Legal Services Authority has called for details from the District Collector, Idukki. Obliging the request made, the District Collector, Idukki has furnished the details and the reports submitted by the Secretary, Idukki District Panchayat, Secretary, Azhutha Block Panchayat and the Secretary, Vandiperiyar Grama Panchayat and other documents.
3. According to the learned Government Pleader, after the initiation of a suo motu writ petition, the Kerala State Legal Services Authority has no jurisdiction to call for details and to be impleaded a party respondent as they a re not just and necessary parties for effective adjudication. For the aforesaid reasons, prayed for dismissal of the impleading petition.
4. It is trite law that the procedure contemplated in the Code of Civil Procedure can be made applicable to the writ proceedings wherever permissible. Order II Rule 2 of the Code of Civil Procedure deals with the power of the Court to strike out or add parties. It reads thus:
“Court may strike out or add parties - The Court may at any stage of the proceedings, either upon or without the application of either party and on such terms as may appear to the Court to be just, order that the name of any party improperly joined, whether as plaintiff or defendant, be struck out and that the name of any person we ought to have been joined, whether as plaintiff or defendant, or whose presence before the Court may be necessary in order to enable the Court effectually and completely to adjudicate upon and settle all the interest litigation. Whenever addition or striking out parties is done, it is necessary for the Court to consider as to whether such persons are required to be added or struck off to adjudicate upon and settle all the issues effectually and completely. In the light of the above provisions, the Kerala State Legal Services Authority may not be required to be impleaded as a party respondent.”
5. In some of the suo motu writ petitions, assistance from the Kerala Legal Services Authority has been taken. In the case on hand, some of the issues raised by the students of the Fathima High School, Mlamala, Idukki are, about condition of bridges, provision for basic amenities, high expenses for treatment, poor transportation facilities and other things.
6. Rule 152 of the High Court Rules reads thus:
“Hearing of third parties:
(1) The Court may order notice of the petition to any person not made party thereto.
(2) At the time of hearing of the petition for admission or at a later state, any person, who desires to be heard in the matter and appears to the Court to be a proper person to be heard, may be heard, notwithstanding that he is not a party but subject to such conditions as to costs or otherwise as the court may deem fit to impose.”
7. Considering the nature of the works undertaken by the Legal Services Authority on the decisions of the Hon'ble Supreme Court and High Court periodically and the public awareness created by the Legal Services Authority, we are of the view that the Kerala State Legal Services Authority has to be heard in this matter. It is an appropriate authority to be heard in the w
