- (1.) THE defects are ignored.
(2.) GRIEVANCE of the appellants is that because of the order of the learned Single Judge dated 16.07.2012 passed in W.P. (S) No. 2484 of 2008, the department may feel prejudiced because of the certain observations and may take legal action only because of the impugned order. Because of certain observations, the petitioners will be deprived of the considerations of his defence fairly by the Department. However, we have considered the submissions of learned counsel for the appellants and perused the order dated 16.07.2012. It appears from the impugned order that the learned Single Judge has taken note of the earlier order dated 05.07.2012, and thereafter, opened the enquiry report, which was submitted by the Deputy Inspector General of Police, Bokaro, Koyla Range. After opening the sealed cover in presence of counsel for the parties then thereafter, the learned Single Judge observed about what has been mentioned in the report submitted by the D.I.G. and then argument of the learned Advocate General was recorded. Then, thereafter, learned counsel for the petitioners' admission was recorded that the petition may be disposed of in the light of the statement made by the learned Additional Advocate General appearing for the respondent nos. 1 -4.
(3.) THE learned Single Judge merely directed the respondent to take necessary legal action in the matter of respondent nos. 5, 6 and 7 and consider the candidature of the petitioners in the light of the statement of the learned Additional Advocate General.;