Rakesh Kumar vs The Deputy Commissioner and Others

A.S. Nehra and S.C. Datta, JJ.—An application under Order 1 Rule 10 read with Section 151, Civil Procedure Code, was filed vide CM. No. 936-A of 1994, which was allowed by this Court on April 18, 1994 and the applicants were ordered to be impleaded as respondents in the writ petition.

Another application (CM. No. 936 of 1994) was filed for restraining respondent No. 4 from raising any construction on the disputed land, which has been purchased by respondent No. 4. Notice of this application was given to the writ petitioner and in the meantime respondent No. 4 was restrained from making any construction on the land in dispute on January 28,1994.

Respondent No. 4 has filed this application for vacating the stay order granted by this Court. Notice of this application was given to the writ petitioner and the added-respondents.

Learned counsel for respondent No. 4 has contended that on the application filed by the added-respondents, respondent No. 4 cannot be restrained from raising the construction on the land in dispute because respondent No. 4 has purchased the land in dispute. He has further contended that a co-respondent cannot obtain a stay order in a writ petition filed by the writ petitioner against his co-respondent.

After hearing the learned counsel for the parties, we find force in the contention raised by the counsel for the respondent No. 4 and hold that the added-respondents cannot obtain a stay in a writ petition filed by the writ petitioner against a co-respondent. Therefore, the stay granted by this Court on January 28, 1994 is vacated.