IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 11-07-2008
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.CHOCKALINGAM
AND
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE R.SUBBIAH
O.S.A.No.79 of 2005
K.Palani .. Appellant
vs
1.National Council of Young Men's Christian
Association of India,New Delhi,
rep. by Chairman and Correspondent
of YMCA College, Nandanam,
Chennai 600 035.
2. State of Tamil nadu
rep. by its Secretary to Government
Department of Education,
Fort St.George, Chennai 600 009.
3. The Director of School Education,
College Road, Nungambakkam,
Chennai 600 006.
4. The District Educational officer,
Chepauk,Chennai 600 005. .. Respondents
Original side appeal preferred under Order XXXVI Rule 11 of O.S. Rules read with Clause 15 of Letters Patent against the order and decretal order dated 21.4.2004 made in Application No.1762 of 2004 in C.S.No.345 of 1998 .
For Appellant : Mr.P.V.S.Giridhar
For Respondent No.1 : Mr.Sivam Sivandaraj
For Respondents 2 to 4 : No appearance
JUDGMENT
(Judgment of the Court was delivered by M.CHOCKALINGAM, J.)
This appeal challenges the order of the learned Single Judge made in Application No.1762 of 2004 seeking impleadment of the appellant as a party in the suit, C.S.No.345 of 1998, whereby the minority status of the first respondent/plaintiff’s Institution was sought for.
2. The Court heard the learned counsel on either side and looked into the the order under challenge along with the grounds.
3. From the materials available on record and also after hearing the submissions made by the counsel for the appellant, it could be seen that the appellant/petitioner is a teacher and during the relevant point of time, he was the Headmaster of the School in respect of which, the question as to minority status is the subject matter in the suit. The appellant participated in the proceedings as to the question of minority status to the 1st respondent-Institution all along and now, when the proceedings are pending before the Court, he should be given an opportunity to put forth his case and thus, he is a necessary party.
4. Insofar as the backwages are concerned, there was a writ petition by the petitioner/appellant herein and the same was ordered by the learned single Judge and thereafter Writ appeal was filed in W.A.No.462 of 2000 where this Court has held that payment of backwages would depend upon the result of the minority status of the said Institution. Under such circumstances, he is also more interested in the result of the suit, which is pending before the Court. Hence, he is a necessary party and he is to be impleaded.
5. Heard the learned counsel for the first respondent on the above contentions.
6. In short, the 1st respondent reiterated the contentions, which were put forth before the learned Single Judge, by stating that the minority status to be accorded or not, is actually in the lis and it is also pending between the State and the plaintiff therein, in which the petitioner/appellant had no say in the matter. Under such circumstances, he could not be a necessary party and hence, the order of the learned Single Judge has got to be sustained.
7. After looking into the materials available and considering the submissions made, this Court is of the considered opinion that the appeal does not carry any merit whatsoever. It is not in controversy that the Civil Suit in C.S.No.345 of 1998 has been filed by the plaintiff, National Council of Young Men’s Christian Association fo India, New Delhi, against the State and its authority seeking for a declaration that it is a minority Institution. The suit was defended by the State and other defendants. Pending the same, the petitioner/ appellant has filed an application stating that he was responsible for initiation of the proceedings questioning the minority status, as he was the Headmaster of the said Institution. Since in the writ appeal, there was a specific observation made insofar as backwages are concerned that it would depend upon the minority status of the Institution, now, this Court is of the considered opinion that none of the grounds now urged by the petitioner/appellant would be a reason to add him as a party. Needless to say that a party could be added to a pending proceedings, provided, if he is a necessary party. The party can be necessary, if the issue before the Court in the absence of that party, could not be effectively adjudicated upon. In the instant case, in order to ascertain the question whether minority status has got to be declared for the Plaintiff’s Institution or not, the appellant/petitioner is not a necessary party. He could not voice either this way or that way. Merely he happened to be the teacher of the said Institution, he cannot say that he is a necessary party to the above proceedings. Apart from that, the observation made in the writ appeal referred to above that the payment of backwages would depend upon the result of the suit cannot give him a right to enter the suit, in which the question as to the minority status of the plaintiff’s Institution has arisen for decision. Hence, he should await the decision of the Court. Instead, he made an application in order to implead himself on that ground, which, in the opinion of this Court cannot be legally countenanced. It is a lis, as rightly pointed out by the learned Single Judge, between the plaintiff’s Institution on one side and the authority on the other side and the appellant/petitioner’s presence in the said case is not at necessary to decide the issued involved in the pending suit, C.S.No.345 of 1998. The appeal does not carry merit whatsoever. Therefore, the appeal is dismissed. No costs.
(M.C.,J.) (R.P.S.,J.)
11-7-2008
VJY
M.CHOCKALINGAM, J.
AND
R.SUBBIAH, J.
VJY
OSA No.79 of 2005
11-07-2008