MP STATE LEGAL SERVICE AUTHORITY Vs. ANUJ KUMAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS order shall also govern the disposal of connected Writ Appeal No.233 of 2012 [M.P.State Legal Service Authority v/s Sanatan Sen] since the writ petitions out of which these appeals are arising have been decided by a common order. It has also been stated by learned Senior Counsel for the parties that the facts and the question of law involved in both the cases are identical.

(2.) FOR the sake of convenience facts are taken from Writ Appeal No.232 of 2012.

(3.) SHRI A.K.Sethi, learned Senior Counsel appearing for the Respondent tried to justify the order passed by the writ Court by pointing out from the order that the Government Advocate was requested by the writ Court to appear on behalf of the appellant herein and thereafter matter has been heard. However, he was unable to support the appellant's contention that the appellant was not informed by the Government Advocate nor he could have as the case was heard and decided on that day itself. He also could not deny the appellant's contention that the Government Advocate was not authorized to appear for the appellant.