The main legal point established in the judgment is the necessity of impleading all necessary parties, particularly the selected candidates, in a writ petition challenging an order passed by an appellate authority, in order to ensure the principles of natural justice and maintain the petition's maintainability.

Rajendra Menon, J.

1. As challenge in both these petitions are made to a common order passed by the Commissioner, Sagar Division Sagar in the matter of appointment of Shiksha Karmi Grade-Ill under Janpad Panchayat Bada Malahara, District Chhatarpur, both these petitions are being decided by this common order.

2. For the sake of convenience, pleadings and documents available in W.P.No.631 /2000 are being referred to.

3. In the year 1999, an advertisement was issued by the Janpad Panchayat, Bada Malahara, advertising 264 vacant posts of Shiksha Karmi Grade-Ill, out of these 264 posts, 174 posts were under the School Education Department and the remaining 90 posts under Rajeev Gandhi Shiksha Mission. Appointment was to be made on the post of Shiksha Karmi Grade-Ill and it was to be made in accordance to the conditions stipulated by the State Government in circular dated 01-01-1998, issued in exercising of powers conferred on the State Government under the M.P. Panchayat Raj Adhiniyam, 1993 for conducting the process of selection in accordance to the statutory Rule, namely the M.P. Panchayat Shiksha Karmi (Recruitment and Service Conditions) Rules, 1997 Annexure P-4.

4. A selection committee was constituted, the selection committee consisted of respondent no.2 Chief Executive Officer, Janpad Panchayat Bada Malahara, respondent no. 3 Block Education Officer, respondent no.4 President of Education Standing Committee, respondent no.5 Member of Standing Committee, respondent no.6 another member of Standing Committee, respondent no.7 member of Education Committee and respondent nos. 8 and 9, Subject Specialist alongwith respondent no. 10 another Subject Specialist, another representative of MX. A. one Devdatta Dwivedi is also alleged to have included in the selection committee. On the basis of the selection conducted, select list Annexure P-1 was issued.

5. On the ground that there are number of illegalities in the selection, near relatives of some of the members of the Selection Committee have been appointed a, writ petition was filed before this court by the petitioners herein being W.P.No.4374/1998. This court finding statutory remedy of appeal available to the petitioners directed the petitioners vide order dated 25-09-1998 to take recourse to the remedy of appeal available before the Collector. The appeal was filed before the Collector and vide order Annexure P-2 dated 31-05-1999 this authority quashed the entire selection mainly on the ground that the selection was not conducted in accordance to the law. However, before the Collector, non of the 294 selected candidates were impleaded, none of them was heard and the Collector passed an order without notice to them and cancelled their appointments.

6. Being aggrieved by cancellation of their selection, 238 selected candidates filed further appeal before the Commissioner, Sagar Division, Sagar and the Commissioner, Sagar Division by the impugned order having allowed the appeal, the petitioners are before this court, challenging the order Annexure P-3 dated 21-12-1999, passed by the Additional Commissioner at the instance of 238 selected candidates who had filed the appeal.

7. Shri A.K. Jain, learned counsel for the petitioners taking me though the reasons given by the Collector in the order Annexure P-2 dated 31-05-1999 submitted that the Collector having found various irregularities in the matter of nepotism shown by the selection committee in appointing their near relatives and by pointing out certain error in the constitution of the selection committee tried to emphasize that the entire selection stands vitiated for the grounds indicated by the Collector, the order passed by the Commissioner interfering with a reasonable order of collector is unsustainable. It was emphasized by him that against the order of Collector, no appeal was maintainable before the Commissioner and therefore, the entire action is unsustainable.

8. Respondents particularly the interveners represented by Shri S