Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:27919 Court No. - 8 Case :- CIVIL REVISION No. - 34 of 2024 Revisionist :- Syed Mohammad Zain Opposite Party :- Syed Mohammad Ashiyam And 3 Others Counsel for Revisionist :- Lokendra Kumar Gupta,Mirza Humayun Qadar Counsel for Opposite Party :- Syed Aftab Ahmad,Chandan Verma,Farhan Habib Hon'ble Jaspreet Singh,J. Heard Shri Mirza Humayan Qadar, Advocate who is appearing under the authority of Shri Lokendra Kumar Gupta, learned counsel for the revisionist and Shri Syed Aftab Ahmad, learned counsel for the respondents. The instant revision has been preferred by the revisionist under Section 83(9) of the Wakf Act, 1995 against the order passed by the U.P. Wakf Tribunal, Lucknow (for short, 'the Tribunal') dated 28.03.2024, whereby an application preferred by the revisionist seeking his impleadment in an appeal preferred by the respondent No.1 was rejected. Learned counsel for the respondent No.1 has raised an objection that initially the present revisionist had attempted to get himself impleaded in an appeal preferred by the respondent No.1. The same was considered by the Tribunal and by means of its order dated 28.03.2024, the application of the revisionist came to be rejected. The revisionist had preferred the instant revision against the said order dated 28.03.2024, however, while the said revision was pending before this Court, the revisionist has also filed his own appeal which is bearing No.30/2024 before the Tribunal. It is urged that in the aforesaid circumstances, once the revisionist has already filed his appeal, which is also engaging the attention of the Tribunal along with the appeal preferred by the respondent No.1, hence, the instant revision may not be entertained. Learned counsel for the revisionist could not dispute the aforesaid facts. It is now well settled that in proceedings where a right of a party is involved and he is not impleaded as a party therein, then the aggrieved party upon showing that he is a necessary or a proper party may get himself impleaded in the said proceedings or institute proceeding seeking necessary relief. In the instant case, upon rejection of the application for impleadment, the revisionist has already instituted his appeal. Hence, in the aforesaid circumstances, there is no occasion left for the revisionist to maintain the instant revision which is accordingly dismissed. However, it will be open for the revisionist to raise all his grounds, available to him in law, in his appeal, needless to say, which shall be considered on its own merits by the concerned Court. With the aforesaid, the revision is dismissed. Order Date :- 12.5.2025 Rakesh/- Digitally signed by :- RAKESH PRAJAPAT High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench