HUMAYAN AZAM Vs. STATE OF JHARKHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE question, which gives rise to filing of this writ petition, is as follows:

(2.) THE short facts are as follows:

(3.) IN reply to the above submissions, learned Counsel appearing for the respondents, namely learned Advocate General for the Government of Jharkhand, Mr. Suresh Kumar, learned JC to GA for the Government of Bihar and Mr. Kalyan Roy, learned Counsel appearing for the respondent Nos. 8 and 9, who have subsequently been impleaded and who were originally appointed as Sub -Inspectors of Police, would make the following contentions: 1995 (1) BLJ 11, which was affirmed by the Supreme Court by the order dated 14.2.1994. In the absence of any valid reason to establish that the case of Bhagwat Prasad Singh was wrongly decided, a different view cannot at all be taken, that too when Bhagwat Prasad Singh case was affirmed by the Supreme Court. Further the same principles have been reiterated in the subsequent decisions rendered in CWJC Nos. 11211/2003 and 1667/2003 by the other Division Bench.