DILIP KUMAR BOHRA Vs. STATE OF JHARKHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) AFTER hearing the learned counsel for the parties, we find that the learned Single Judge should have examined the issue and the question as to why, under what circumstances and on what basis, did the respondents suspend the registration earlier granted in favour of the petitioner/appellant. Without doing that the learned Single Judge has summarily dismissed the writ petition and that too without assigning any reason and by passing non -speaking order. If the petitioner/appellant was earlier granted registration as a contractor, why did it have to be suspended later on by the Government was indeed a question which requires answer.

(2.) IN the premises, therefore, the appeal is allowed, the impugned order passed by the learned Single Judge is set aside and the respondents are directed to file counter affidavit in the writ petition within four weeks from today. We are told that CWJC No. 351 of 2001, identical to this case, is pending before a Single Bench of this Court, and the next date fixed in that case is 12.3.2001. We direct that the writ petition giving rise to this appeal be also tied up with that case and fixed on 12.3.2001 before appropriate Single Bench. No order as to cost.