NAMO NARAYAN SINGH Vs. STATE OF JHARKHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Aggrieved of order dated 31.7.2015 passed in W.P.(S) No. 1433 of 2010 whereby, challenge to the order of cancellation of appointment of the writ petitioner has been rejected, the instant Letters Patent Appeal has been filed.

(2.) Heard.

(3.) Dr. S.N.Pathak, the learned senior counsel for the appellant referring to the decision of this Court rendered in "Krishnaji and others Vs. State of Jharkhand and others" reported in 2006(4) JLJR 702 contends that after the decision of this Court in the aforesaid case, it was not open to the respondentState to cancel the appointment of the appellant. Only 932 persons were identified by the respondents who were beneficiaries of malpractice during the selection and thus, the respondents are bound by their own stand. It is contended that the learned Single Judge erred in ignoring the fact that in "Ranjay Kumar Singh Vs. State of Jharkhand and others" reported in "2009(4) JLJR 543 this Court quashed the order of dismissal from service passed on the allegation of overwriting and interpolation in the Master Chart and therefore, the appellant's appointment cannot be cancelled on similar ground of overwriting in the Master Chart.