Romesh Ashok v. Union of India
Case brief
What is this about?
Writ petition challenging the CATT Cuttack Bench order rejecting amendment of Original Application allowing amendment for effective adjudication.
What did the court decide?
Liberty granted to file better application for amendment of Original Application within two weeks.
What the court decided
W.P.(C) NO.25404 OF 2017
- 08.12.2017 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr.D.Sahu, learned counsel for opposite party nos.1 to 4.
- This Writ Petition has been filed by the petitioner challenging the order dated 02.11.2017 passed by the Central Administrative Tribunal, Cuttack Bench, Cuttack in M.A. No.72 of 2017 arising out of O.A. No.260/165/2013 rejecting an application filed for amendment of the Original Application.
- Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner has impleaded the Railway Recruitment Board, Secunderabad and the Railway Recruitment Board, New Delhi represented through its Secretary as respondent Nos.2 and 4 respectively in the Original Application. Since the Railway Board has already been made a party, the part of the impugned order so far as impleading the Members of the Board in their personal capacity in the Original Application may not be necessary. However, in absence of necessary averments the Original Application cannot be adjudicated effectively and the applicants will be prejudiced. Therefore, the impugned order need be interfered with.
BP
- Considering the above and after going through the schedule of amendment, it appears that the applicants intend to incorporate certain facts by way of amendment of the Original Application for effective adjudication of the dispute. Since the Railway Board has already been impleaded as party to the Original Application, the persons, who have passed the orders as Members of the Board need not be impleaded in their personal capacity as the Board is
2
Issues for consideration
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the impugned order rejecting amendment of the Original Application due to lack of necessary averments requires interference.
Whether the Members of the Railway Board need to be impleaded in their personal capacity when the Board is already impleaded.
Parties & counsel
- petitioner
Petitioner
- respondent
Central Administrative Tribunal, Cuttack Bench
- respondent
Railway Recruitment Board, Secunderabad
- respondent
Railway Recruitment Board, New Delhi
Coram
Case details
As recorded by the court registry
Similar cases
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court