The High Court of Orissa dismissed an appeal challenging an interim order. The Court held that the appeal is not maintainable because the appellants were not parties to the underlying writ petition and failed to file an impleadment petition first.
The appeal stands dismissed in the interests of procedural justice.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK W.A. No. 1362 of 2023
Talaribandh Village Committee, Nayagarh and Another
..……. Appellants
Mr. Digambara Mishra, Advocate Versus
State of Odisha and Others
..…….. Respondents Mr. D.K. Mohanty, Advocate Ms. S.S. Das, Advocate (Opposite Party No.5)
CORAM:
JUSTICE S. TALAPATRA JUSTICE SAVITRI RATHO
ORDER
04.07.2023
Order No.
1. This matter is taken up through Hybrid Mode.
2. Heard Mr. Digambara Mishra, learned counsel appearing for the appellants.
3. Mr. Mishra, learned counsel has fairly submitted that the present appellants did not file any impleadment petition in the proceeding being W.P.(C) No. 21615 of 2020 which is pending before the learned Single Judge.
4. By means of this appeal, the interim order dated 04.09.2020 has been challenged after 992 days.
5. In our considered view, this appeal is not maintainable in as much as the appellants are not parties in the said writ petition. If the interim order as referred above is to be challenged by the appellants, they have to approach the learned Single Judge for impleadment and thereafter they can raise the objection in respect of the said interim order dated 04.09.2020 or its continuation. As they have not followed that procedure, they cannot be allowed to pursue this appeal.
Page 1 of 2
2
6. Accordingly, this appeal stands dismissed.
7. However, dismissal of this appeal will not preclude the appellants in approaching the learned Single Judge for their impleadment in the said proceeding.
8. Mr. D.K. Mohanty, learned Additional Government Advocate appears for the State and Ms. S.S. Das, learned counsel has appeared for the opposite party no.5 on advance notice.
(S. Talapatra)
Judge
(Savitri Ratho)
puspa Judge
Signature Not Verified
Digitally Signed Signed by: PUSPANJALI MOHAPATRA Designation: Personal Assistant Reason: Authentication Location: Orissa High Court Date: 11-Jul-2023 15:26:05
Page 2 of 2
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the appeal, filed by non-parties challenging an interim order in a pending writ petition without first getting impleadment, is maintainable?
Talaribandh Village Committee, Nayagarh
State of Odisha
S. Talapatra
Savitri Ratho
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
