Appeal by Special Leave from the Judgment and Order dated the 4 10 1974 of the Rajasthan High Court in D. B, Civil Special Appeal No.
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by RAY, C.J. In this matter leave was granted on 30 March, 1972.
Mrs. Shyamla Papu, R.N. Sachthey and Girish Chandra, for respondents.
Ltd. v. Railway Board, Ministry of Railways, Government of India, New Delhi 2 .
Reliance was placed in support of the companytention on the decision Hari Vishnu Karnath v. Ahmad Syed Isak Ors.
Leave was companyfined to the question whether Union of India is a necessary party.
The petitioner in that case made an applica tion under Article 226 to question the validity of the ban imposed by the Railway Board on the news weekly Indian Observer.
On appeal the Division Bench affirmed the decision of the trial companyrt and held after referring to two decisions of this Court that the Union of India is a necessary party.
The trial companyrt rejected the application on the ground that the Union of India was number impleaded.
Leave was granted because it was companytended that there were decisions to support the appellants companytention, that the Union of India is number a necessary party.
This decision can by numberstretch of imagination be of any aid to the appellant in the present case.
Counsel for the appellant companytended that the General Manager is the authority to hear these matters regarding the removal, and, therefore, that is the appropriate party.
We gave leave to settle this question.
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION Civil Appeal No.
The appellant applied under Article 226 in the High Court of Rajasthan.
The appellant felt aggrieved and filed the application under Article 226.
That was a case relating to an Election Petition.
The appellant was an employee of the Northern Railway.
His appeal against the order of removal was rejected by the General Manager.
He was removed from service with effect from, 2 January 1969.
Counsel for the appellant relied on the decision of the Punjab High Court in Observer Publications Pvt.
432 of 1976.
M. Singhvi, K.B. Rohtagi, S. K. Dhingra, Vijay, K. Jain and M.M. Kashyap, for the appellant.
134 of 1973 .
