The necessity of including an intervener in a writ petition when prior licensed rights may be impacted by an interim order.

Mr. Syed E. Huda …..For the petitioner Mr. Sirsanya Bandopadhyay Ms. Tapati Samanta Mr. Arindam Ghosh ….For the State Mr. Anindya Bose Mr. Golam Mohiuddin Mr. Mridul Biswas ….For the added party Mr. Huda, learned counsel for the petitioner frankly submits that the petitioner was directed to use opposition against CAN 1 of 2025 and CAN 2 of 2025. The petitioner was very seeks so he could not appear before this court. Accordingly, the opposition has not prepared. However, Mr. Huda also frankly submits that the intending intervener is a person in favour of whom the respondent authority earlier granted license. So he may be a necessary party in this writ petition.

Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent authority submits that this court has passed an interim order directing the respondent authority not to issue license till the disposal of appeals pending before the Hon’ble Division Bench being WPA 1543 of 2024. State was unaware about the said interim order but has issued the license in favour of the intending intervener on 24th of February, 2025. Thereafter the State authority has come to know about that order and the license issued in favour of the intending intervener has been revoked by specific memo dated 19th June, 2025.

This being the status of this matter and the fact suggests that the petitioner challenged the vacancy notification on the ground of redundancy of WPDS (Maintenance and Control) Order, 2013, Intending intervener is a person who was selected by the Government for impugned vacancy; thereby it appears that the intending intervener is a necessary party, whose presence is required to dispose of the matter.

Accordingly, the intending intervener namely “Lohuchar Fatepur samabay Krishi Unnayan Samity” be made party as a respondent no. 5 of the instant writ petition. The petitioner to incorporate the name of added respondent in the cause title of the writ petition within a week.

As the added respondent has already appeared, the petitioner only to serve a copy of writ petition upon the added respondent no. 5 through his Advocate-on-

record.

Under the above observation CAN 1 of 2025 is disposed of.

The petitioner is at leave to use opposition against CAN 2 of 2025 within three weeks.

Let the matter appear in the list o 12^th August, 2025.