Amreshwar Pratap Sahi, J. - (1.) Heard learned counsel for the petitioner.
(2.) The 1st objection taken to the impugned judgement is that the claim petition filed by the respondent was incompetent as it had been instituted without impleading proper and necessary parties, namely, the District Level and the State Level Committees constituted for the purpose of scrutiny of caste.
(3.) It is further submitted that the Tribunal committed an error in ignoring the fact of the filing of an appeal against the decree of the Civil Court on which reliance was placed by the respondent and, therefore, extending the benefit of the said decree to the respondent vitiates the impugned order.;