ARUN KUMAR Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS letters patent appeal is directed against an order by which the learned Single Judge has dismissed the writ petition so far as the appellant is concerned summarily on the ground that he had suppressed the fact that he had earlier moved this Court.

(2.) THE appellant figured as petitioner no. 4 in the connected case, viz., CWJC No. 5557/2001 which was taken up along with CWJC Nos. 4548/2001 and 5989/2001. The writ petitions except on behalf of the appellant were disposed of with liberty to the concerned petitioners to file representation, if so advised.

(3.) SHRI Narendra Prasad, learned counsel for the appellant, submitted that it is true that the appellant had moved this Court earlier in CWJC No. 8850/93 and CWJC No. 3898/99 which fact was not mentioned in the relevant paragraphs of the connected writ petition but this was a bonafide mistake on the part of the appellant. He stated that the writ petition (CWJC No. 5557/2001) was filed on behalf of seven petitioners, the affidavit in support of contents of which was affirmed by petitioner no. 1 Ukar Singh, the fact that the appellant had filed writ petitions earlier could not be stated by him (Unkar Singh) in the petition. Counsel pointed out in this connection that the earlier writ petitions i.e. CWJC Nos. 8850/93 and 3898/99 were filed by the appellant alone. No sooner the mistake came to notice, it was stated, the appellant filed application for amendment (I.A.No. 2330/2001) on 9.5.2001 but unfortunately this was not brought to the notice of the learned Judge at the time of hearing of the case.