A validly enacted law cannot be challenged on the grounds of hardship; the provisions apply uniformly, and existing licenses are not affected by new distance requirements.

Order :

S. Chandrashekhar, J.

I.A. No.1/25:-

1. This application under Order I Rule 10 of Code of Civil Procedure has been filed by Bhakhar Singh seeking his impleadment in the present writ petition.

2. The applicant states that he is running a restaurant and obtained a license for Beer Bar in the name and style of Yaduraj Restaurant. The grievance of the applicant is that the writ petitioner is running a liquor shop unauthorizedly from her warehouse. According to the applicant, such unauthorized use of the warehouse is causing difficulties for him to run his Beer Bar. In the application vide I.A. No.1/2025, the applicant states and makes the following allegations:-

“3.That it is relevant to submit hee that applicant is running a restaurant cum ber var for which he have been issued license by the excise department. That is petitioner is having a warehouse near the bar of the applicant which is used as a liquor shop unauthorized and in illegal manner. The petitioner is using his warehouse as a liquor shop and counter sell the liquor after the time prescribes by the excise department and even using the warehouse as a liquor shop illegally.

4. That is further it is pertain to mention here that as warehouse of the petitioner is situated nearby bar of the applicant and because of this applicant is facing a great trouble to run his bar as petitioner is using his warehouse as a liqour shop and selling the liquor after the prescribe time by the excise department.

5. That is further applicant submitted a complaint regarding the warehouse which have been used by the petitioner for unauthorized and illegal counter sell of the liquor also. Petitioner is using his warehouse as a liquor shop in unauthorized and illegal manner and selling liquor on the counsel and after the time period prescribed by the Rajasthan excise department illegal. Due to all these circumstances applicant is facing great hardship and trouble and willsuffer irreparable loss and facing a great trouble to run his bar as the ware house of the petitioner is situated at nearby and petitioner using it as a wine shop unauthorized and in illegal manner. The photos regarding counter sell of the liquor from the ware house unauthorized and in illegal manner after time prescribed time period are also submitted herewith and marked as Annexure-2.”

3. Having regard to the settled position in law for entertaining an application under Order I Rule 10 of the Code of Civil Procedure, we are not inclined to entertain this application for impleadment filed by Bhakhar Singh.

4. In “Udit Narain Singh Malpahariya v. Additional Member Board of Revenue, Bihar and Anr.” (1962) SCC OnLine SC 130, the Hon’ble Supreme Court held as under:-

“7. To answer the question raised it would be convenient at the outset to ascertain who are necessary or proper parties in a proceeding. The law on the subject is well settled : it is enough if we state the principle. A necessary party is one without whom no order can be made effectively; a proper party is one in whose absence an effective order can be made but whose presence is necessary for a complete and final decision on the question involved in the proceeding.”

5. In view thereof, we hold that the applicant, namely, Bhakhar Singh is neither a necessary party nor a proper party who needs to be impleaded as a party respondent in the present proceeding and, accordingly, I.A. No.1/2025 is dismissed.

I.A. No.2/25:-

This application under Order I Rule 10 of Code of Civil Procedure has been filed by Bhawani Singh seeking his impleadment in the present writ petition.

2. The applicant states that he is running a wine shop at shop no.5, Nagar Parishad, Barmer. The grievance of the applicant is that the writ petitioner is running a liquor