D. P. S. CHAUHAN, J. ( 1 ) THE petitioner No. 1 is a registered society, registered under the Madhya Pradesh Society Registration Act, 1973, bearing Registra- tion No. 9681 / 17. 12. 1980. By means of this petition, it has approached this court along with five other persons seeking relief for issuance of writ in the nature of certiorari quashing the impugned order in the order-sheet dated 14. 5. 1986 (Annexure P-7 to the petition ). ( 2 ) HEARD the learned Counsel for the petitioner and the learned State Counsel. ( 3 ) LEARNED Counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner- society applied for allotment of the Nazul land situated at Block No. 4 Plot No. 18, Civil Lines, Jabalpur having an area measuring 5593 sq. ft. for the purpose of construction of office building as well as for press building. It was registered as Case No. R. C. No. 18/a/20 (1) of 82-83 by the Nazul Officer. The Nazul Officer recommended for allotment of some land in favour of the petitioner-Society, out of the aforesaid land of Plot No. 18. The Additional Collector directed the nazul Officer for calling fresh report from the Town and Country planning, and Local Self Government and Municipal Corporation, Jabalpur, as there was an objection for allotment of the said land. Another application was moved by one Congress Sewa Dal Biradri (I) to the Collector which was registered as revenue Case No. 152-A/20- (l)/84-85 for allotment of the same land and the recommendation was also made for allotment of the said land to the Congress sewa Dal Biradri (I) on 10. 7. 1985. In the case of the petitioner, the following order was passed on 14. 5. 1986 : by the said order, the petitioners' case was closed. ( 4 ) LEARNED Counsel for the petitioner submitted that the respondents have not acted fairly and have acted under the influence and pressure of chandra Kumar Bhanot, the Minister for Irrigation, Government of Madhya pradesh and in this context he has invited the attention of the Court to the fact that anterior to the influence of the Minister, the case for allotting the same land to the petitioner was pending for consideration but subsequently, under the influence of the Minister, recommendation for allotment of the same land was made in favour of Congress Sewa Dal Biradri (I) on 10. 7. 7. 1985, which was a case subsequently registered and the case of the petitioner was rejected by means of the impugned order in the absence of the petitioner, on 14. 5. 1986. This indicates the partisan attitude on account of the pressure of the Minister. Both the cases related to the allotment of the same piece of land and the recommendation was made in the case subsequently registered and the case which was earlier in point of time, was rejected subsequently by saying that the land has already been proposed to be allotted to Congress Sewa Dal Biradri (I ). ( 5 ) LEARNED Counsel for the State submitted that the allotment has not yet been made in regard to the land as civil suit Nos. 165-A/87 and 66-A/87 are pending wherein injunction orders were granted and, therefore, no final action for allotment could be taken. ( 6 ) SO far as the case of the petitioners is concerned, it is apparent that it has not been considered on merits. Firstly, the petitioner-Society has got the status by way of a society registered under the Statute whereas the status of the Congress Sewa Dal Biradri (I) is the known, as to what is its status and how it comes within the category of institution. It appears to be a political organisation. ( 7 ) LEARNED State Counsel further submitted that congress Sewa Dal biradri (I) has not been impleaded in the petition as a party. Therefore, the petition is liable to be dismissed. ( 8 ) THIS submission has no substance. As no allotment has been made. Only recommendation has been made in its favour. Therefore, the petition cannot be dismissed on this ground. ( 9 ) IN view of the above, the writ petition deserves to be allowed. It is accordingly allowed. The impugned order dated 14. 5. 1986 rejecting the case of the petitioners for allotment of the land is quashed. Petitioners' Case No. R. C. No. 18/a/20 (1) of 82-83 is restored to its original number. The respondents are directed not to give effect to the recommendation for allotment in favour of the Congress Sewa Dal Biradri (I) and both the cases registered as R. C. No. 18/a/20 (1) of 82-83 and Revenue Case No. 151-A/20- (l)/84-85 be considered together and the orders may be passed on the merits of the matter, after hearing the parties. The respondents are directed not to give effect to the recommendation for allotment in favour of the Congress Sewa Dal Biradri (I) and both the cases registered as R. C. No. 18/a/20 (1) of 82-83 and Revenue Case No. 151-A/20- (l)/84-85 be considered together and the orders may be passed on the merits of the matter, after hearing the parties. No order as to costs, .