ORDER : R. SUBHASH REDDY, J. This appeal, under Clause 15 of the Letters Patent, is filed by the original petitioner in Special Civil Application No. 4070 of 2016, aggrieved by the order dated 19.9.2016 passed by the learned Single Judge. 2. This Special Civil Application is filed with the prayers, which read as under: “(A) Your Lordships be pleased to issue a writ of certiorari or a writ in the nature of certiorari or any other appropriate writ, order or direction, directing the respondent authorities to give Sardar Patel Junior Award to the petitioner with full honour by taking the same back from Master Ayush Patel, in the interest of justice; (B) Your Lordships be pleased to direct the respondent authorities to take back Sardar Patel Junior Award which is given to Master Ayush Patel forthwith, pending the admission, hearing and final disposal of this petition, in the interest of justice; (C) Your Lordships be pleased to grant such other and further reliefs, as may be deemed fit by this Hon'ble Court, in the interest of justice.” 3. Having regard to the affidavit-in-reply filed by the 2nd respondent in the petition, the learned Single Judge has dismissed the petition. In the said reply, it is stated that, as per Rule 18(2) of the Sardar Patel Award Rules, 1997, the players have to obtain 70, 50 and 30 marks for First, Second and Third positions respectively in open competition at national level and, as per Rule 18(5), the player, who has stood first at national level i.e. who has obtained 70 marks, will be automatically entitled to Sardar Patel award and in that case, the marks obtained at State Level will not be considered. It is also categorically stated in the affidavit by the 2nd respondent that, as per the marks obtained at national level, Master Ayush Patel is more meritorious, as he has obtained 70 marks at national level and therefore, he was awarded Sardar Patel award. Apart from the reasons stated above, which was discussed by the learned Single Judge, we are of the view that the petition ought to have been dismissed on yet another reason that, though the petitioner specifically claimed to take back the award from Master Ayush Patel and to award the petitioner, Master Ayush Patel is not even made party respondent in this petition. 4. 4. Having regard to the reason stated in the order passed by the learned Single Judge and further, in absence of Master Ayush Patel being joined as party respondent in the petition, we are of the view that there is no ground to interfere with the order passed by the learned Single Judge. Letters Patent Appeal, being devoid of any merits, is dismissed. Consequently, Civil Application also stands disposed of.