SANDEP KUMAR ROY Vs. STATE OF JHARKHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard learned counsel for the parties.

(2.) The petitioner had preferred W.P.(C) 246 of 2011 and sought the relief of quashing of an order passed in C.W.J.C. No. 996 of 1998 dated 15th December 1998 which was passed by the Patna High Court. The learned Single Judge vide order dated 26.04.2011 dismissed the writ petition of the petitioner after observing that the petitioner's contention that petitioner was not a party in that writ petition being C.W.J.C. No. 996 of 1998, therefore, he cannot prefer appeal, is misconceived and aggrieved party can prefer Letters Patent Appeal.

(3.) Learned counsel for the appellant relied upon the Judgement of the Hon'ble Supreme Court delivered in the case of Shivdeo Singh & Others Vs. State of Punjab & Others, 1963 AIR(SC) 1909and submitted that in that matter, a final order passed in the writ petition, deciding the writ petition, was set aside by the same Hon'ble Judge of the Punjab and Haryana High Court while exercising jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India and, therefore, in view of said Judgement, this writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India is maintainable and the learned Single Judge of the same High court could have set aside the order of the Single Judge.