MOHAMMAD RAFIQUL ISLAM Vs. STATE OF WEST BENGAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By an order dated 29th June, 2000, all these appeals, along with the writ application filed by one Shri Tapan Kumar Dey [W.P. 7155(W) of 2000], were directed to be heard together. Accordingly, all these matters were taken up for consideration.

(2.) At the very outset, however, Mr. P.N. Chatterjee, learned Advocate, appearing for the respondent No. 8, took a preliminary objection that notwithstanding the order passed on 29th June, 2000, the writ petition of Shri Tapan Kumar Dey could not be heard along with the appeals in view of the Division Bench decision of this Court in the case of Ram Nath Santra & Ors., v. State of West Bengal & Ors., reported in 2001(1) CHN, page 649.

(3.) Mr. Chatterjee submitted that in Ram Nath Santra's case the Division Bench had held that a writ application under Article 226 of the Constitution of India was invariably to be heard by a single Judge at the first instance and by consent the parties could not confer upon the Division Bench jurisdiction which it did not otherwise possess, to dispose of a writ application as a Court of first instance. Mr. Chatterjee urged that in view of the said decision the writ petition was required to be heard by the learned single Judge even though the facts involved therein may be the same as those in the three appeals.