Manju Lama vs. Grishma Lama
Held
The Court allowed the Miscellaneous Application, impleading Smti. Manju Lama as Respondent No. 5 in the main writ petition. The Court reasoned that in the interest of justice, and considering the applicant's status as the widow of the deceased employee whose family pension was the subject matter of the writ petition, her impleadment was appropriate. Although objections were raised regarding her nominee status, the counsel for the writ petitioner fair-mindedly agreed to the impleadment. The Court directed the Registry to make necessary corrections to add the applicant as Respondent No. 5. The Miscellaneous Case was accordingly disposed of.
Facts
This matter concerns a Miscellaneous Application filed by Smti. Manju Lama seeking impleadment as a necessary party in a connected writ petition (WP(C) No. 538 of 2018). The applicant is the widow of (L) Bijay Kumar Lama, a deceased ex-employee of the Goods and Services Tax and Customs office. The dispute in the main writ petition relates to family pension. The respondents initially objected to the impleadment, arguing the applicant was neither a proper nor necessary party as she was not the recorded nominee, with the writ petitioner and her brother being the recorded nominees. However, the counsel for the writ petitioner conceded to the impleadment in the interest of justice.
Key Issues
1. Whether Smti. Manju Lama, as the widow of a deceased employee, is a necessary or proper party to be impleaded in a writ petition concerning family pension, particularly when she is not a recorded nominee. This issue turns on principles of natural justice and the right to be heard in matters affecting her potential entitlement. Contentions: Petitioner/Applicant (Smti. Manju Lama): Argued that as the widow of the deceased employee, she has a direct interest in the family pension and therefore should be heard before any final orders are passed, making her a necessary party. Revenue/State: Initially objected to the impleadment, contending that the applicant was neither a proper nor necessary party as she was not the recorded nominee. The recorded nominees were stated to be the writ petitioner and her brother.
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
1
Serial No. 01 Supplementary List HIGH COURT OF MEGHALAYA AT SHILLONG
MC[WP(C)] No. 88 of 2019 In WP(C) No. 538 of 2018
Date of order: 26.06.2019 Coram: Hon’ble Mr. Justice H.S. Thangkhiew, Judge
Appearance: For the Petitioner(s)/Applicant(s) : Mr. K.C. Gautam, Adv. For the Respondent(s)/Opp.Party : Dr. N. Mozika, Sr. Adv. with
Mr. W.S. Gayang, Adv.
This instant Misc. Application has been filed for impleadment of the applicant/petitioner as a necessary party in the connected writ petition.
The applicant states that she is the wife of (L) Bijay Kumar Lama, ex-employee of the Office of the Commissioner, Goods and Services Tax and Customs formerly known as the Office of the Commissioner Central Excise and Customs. (L) Bijay Kumar Lama died while in service leaving behind the applicant widow and two children. Prayer is made that as the dispute is with regard to family pension, the applicant may be heard before final orders are passed in the application.
Though objections has been filed with regard to the impleadment of the applicant by submitting that
The judgment continues below.
Read the full judgment
A free account opens 10 full GST judgments a month (one account works on both bharattax.net and this site). Re-reading one you have already opened does not count again.
The summary, the parties, the sections and the citations above are open to everyone and always will be. Only the text of the order and the PDF are metered.
Reproduced from the public record of the Meghalaya High Court. Verify against the court's own copy before relying on it. Income tax judgments are on bharattax.net.