Case Note & Summary
The dispute arose from a seniority issue involving the appellant and respondents who were appointed as Sectional Officers at Haryana Agricultural University. The appellant challenged a High Court decision that favored the respondents, who were appointed on an ad hoc basis in 1982 and later regularized. The High Court's order dated 23.11.1992 had directed that the respondents be treated as regular employees from their initial appointment date, which the appellant claimed adversely affected his seniority. The appellant filed a review petition against the High Court's order, which was dismissed, leading to the present appeal. The appellant argued that he was unaware of the original judgment and thus could not file for review sooner. However, the respondents contended that the appellant had knowledge of the judgment and was not a necessary party to the original writ petition. The Supreme Court analyzed the appellant's locus standi and concluded that he had no standing to challenge the review application since he was not a party to the original proceedings and no relief was sought against him. The court emphasized that seniority is a civil right and not a fundamental right, affirming the High Court's dismissal of the review application. Consequently, the Supreme Court dismissed the appeal without costs.
Headnote
A) Civil Procedure - Review Application - Maintainability - Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, Order 47 - The court held that the appellant lacked locus standi to file a review application as he was not a necessary party in the original writ petition and no relief was claimed against him. The review application was deemed not maintainable as the original judgment had become final and binding (Paras 13-17).
Issue of Consideration
Whether the appellant had locus standi to file the application for review of the High Court's judgment dated 23.11.1992.
Final Decision
The Supreme Court dismissed the appeal, affirming the High Court's decision that the review application was not maintainable due to the appellant's lack of locus standi.
Law Points
- Review application maintainability
- Seniority determination
- Locus standi in review petitions
