Order

1. Applications (I.A No.1/25 and I.A No.3/25) for impleadment as party respondent stand already decided.

2. Applications (I.A No.02/2025 and I.A No.04/25) for recalling of order dated 01.09.2025 moved by the Associations who have not been impleaded as party. Since the application for impleadment itself is rejected, the applications for recalling moved by such applicants also stand rejected.

3. The matter comes up on the issue framed by this Court regarding the jurisdiction of Bench and the jurisdiction of the Principal seat. In the case of Shri Ram Rakh Vyas Vs. Union of India 1977 RLW 65 this Court held as under:

“31. With respect, we are unable to accept the construction placed by the Madhya Pradesh High Court on the words 'arising in the districts of.' The words 'arising in' must, in the context, mean 'pertaining to the districts of' or 'arising from'. Any other meaning given to these words would result in a construction reductio absurdum. If a provision in a remedial statute is reasonably capable of two constructions, that construction should be preferred which furthers the policy of the Act and is more beneficial to those in whose interest the Act may have been passed, a