Code of Civil Procedure section 1086 provides in pertinent part that a writ of mandate "must be issued upon the verified petition of the party beneficially interested." This provision has been held to establish a standing requirement--the writ will issue only at the request of one who is beneficially interested in the subject matter of the action. (Parker v. Bowron, supra, 40 Cal. 2d at p. 351.) To establish a beneficial interest, the petitioner must show he or she has some special interest to be served or some particular right to be preserved or protected through issuance of the writ. (Carsten v. Psychology Examining Com. (1980) 27 Cal. 3d 793, 796 166 Cal. Rptr. 844, 614 P.2d 276.) Stated differently, the writ must be denied if the petitioner will gain no direct benefit from its issuance and suffer no direct detriment if it is denied. (Parker v. Bowron, supra, 40 Cal. 2d at p. 351.) This standard is applicable to proceedings in administrative mandate (Bodinson Mfg. Co. v. California E. Com. (1941) 17 Cal. 2d 321, 328-330 109 P.2d 935), and it applies in actions based upon CEQA. ( Santiago County Water Dist. v. County of Orange (1981) 118 Cal. App. 3d 818, 832 173 Cal. Rptr. 602; see California Aviation Council v. County of Amador, supra, 200 Cal. App. 3d at p. 349 (conc. opn. of Blease, J.).) Standing is a jurisdictional issue that may be raised at any time in the proceedings. (Common Cause v. Board of Supervisors (1989) 49 Cal. 3d 432, 438 261 Cal. Rptr. 574, 777 P.2d 610.) In order to pursue a cause of action, the plaintiff's standing must be established in some appropriate manner. (Parker v. Bowron (1953) 40 Cal. 2d 344, 351 254 P.2d 6; Friendly Village Community Assn., Inc. v. Silva & Hill Constr. Co. (1973) 31 Cal. App. 3d 220, 224 107 Cal. Rptr. 123, 69 A.L.R.3d 1142; see California Aviation Council v. County of Amador (1988) 200 Cal. App. 3d 337, 349 246 Cal. Rptr. 110 (conc. opn. of Blease, J.).)