The court allows amendments to a writ petition to include challenges to administrative orders and permits substitution of deceased parties with their legal representatives.

JUDGMENT :

RAJESH SHANKAR, J.

I.A. No.2361 of 2007 :

1. The present interlocutory application has been filed on behalf of the petitioners seeking amendment in the writ petition primarily challenging the order dated 15^th June, 2006 passed by the Circle Officer, Medininagar, Palamau.

2. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that pursuant to filing of the writ petition, the Circle Officer, Medininagar, Palamau vide order dated 15^th June, 2006 directed the Halka Karmchari to cancel the demand running in the name of the petitioners with respect to the land appertaining to Khata No.216, Plot No.1010 of Village-Singrakala, Circle and P.S.-Medininagar, Thana No.125, District-Palamau measuring an area of 5.50 acres and also directed to open a demand with respect to 3.50 acres land of the said plot and khata in favour of the respondent no.5, a copy of which has been annexed as Annexure-8 to the present interlocutory application. It is Further submitted that permitting the petitioners to challenge the said order will not change the nature of the present writ petition.

3. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and for the reasons stated in the present interlocutory application, the petitioners are permitted to challenge the order dated 15^th June, 2006 (Annexure-8 to the present interlocutory application) passed by the Circle Officer, Medininagar, Palamau.

4. Necessary insertion in paragraph no.1 as well as prayer portion of the writ petition be made by the counsel for the petitioners in course of the day.

5. I.A. No.2361 of 2007 is, accordingly, disposed of.

I.A. No.6185 of 2022:

6. The present interlocutory application has been filed for substitution of the respondent no.5-Shyam Narayan Singh who has died during the pendency of the present writ petition on 29^th March, 2022.

7. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioners came to know about the death of the respondent no.5 on 11^th July, 2022 and after ascertaining the details of his heirs, they have filed the present application for substitution. He further submitted that respondent no.5 has died leaving behind his widow, sons and daughters as his heirs/legal representatives whose description has been given in paragraph no.1 of the present interlocutory application. Hence, the respondent no.5 may be permitted to be substituted with the said heirs.

8. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and for the reasons stated in the present interlocutory application, let the respondent no.5 be substituted with his heirs/legal representatives whose description has been given in paragraph no.1 of the present interlocutory application.

9. Necessary substitution in the cause title of the present writ petition be made by the counsel for the petitioners in course of the day.

10. I.A. No.6185 of 2022 is, accordingly, disposed of.

W.P. (C) No.2252 of 2006:

11. Issue notice to newly substituted respondent nos.5(i) to 5(viii).

12. Mr. Baban Prasad, Advocate appears and waives notice on behalf of the respondent nos.5(i) to 5(viii). He submits that Vakalatnama on behalf of the said respondents has already been filed.

13. Put up this case under the heading “For Hearing” after four weeks.