- (1.) THIS Court on 5.7.2012 has passed the order as under:- " Learned counsel for the petitioners, in the light of supplementary counter affidavit dated 18.04.2012 filed by Benjamin Kindo on behalf of respondents, has stated that since all other petitioners, except petitioner no.4, have joined their services and are not in touch with the learned counsel for the petitioners, as such, petition on their behalf may be dismissed, whereas petitioner no.4 may only be permitted to proceed with the petition alone. Permitted to do so. Learned counsel for the petitioner has vehemently argued that eight post of 'Bigular Sipahi' were advertised; further stated that Respondent nos.5, 6 and 7 have applied for the post of 'Samanya Sipahi' (Civil Constable) and have not applied for 'Bigular Sipahi' as is clear from their application forms as annexed with the counter affidavit. He has further submitted that the word 'Bigular' in bracket was added with malafide intention at the subsequent stage, to provide them appointments. Specific affidavit of Respondent no.3 be filed to the effect as to whether Roll Numbers were provided to the candidates differently for different four categories. Respondent no.3 shall also clarify as to why applications of the private respondents, not showing clearly for which post they are applying, were not rejected. He will enquire and report by way of affidavit as to whether the word 'Bigular' was added later on and is in different ink from the ink the application forms were filled up. Original application forms of the private respondents and entire record shall also be produced before this Court for perusal, at the time of hearing. List on 13th July 2012. Copy of the order be provided to the learned counsels for the parties on payment of usual charges."
(2.) PURSUANT to the Court's direction dated 5.7.2012, Shri Lakshman Prasad Singh, Deputy Inspector General of Police, Bokaro, Koyla Range, has conducted an enquiry, as reported by him vide his report dated 12th July, 2012 contained in Memo No. 939/G.S., which is placed before this Court in a sealed cover and has been read with the help of the learned counsel for the parties by opening the sealed cover. As per the report submitted by the D.I.G., the original application forms of Gyanu Thappa (respondent no.5)-name deleted vide order dated 28.4.2011, Bhasker Thappa (respondent no. 6) and Tarun Thappa (respondent no. 7) were examined and it has been found that initially the word "Bugler" was not written. However, it was added later on with different ink. The report further suggests that the candidature of respondents no. 5, 6 and 7 ought to have been rejected in view of incomplete application and their candidature should not have been considered for the post of "Bugler Constable". Mr. Ajit Kumar, learned Advocate General, appearing for respondents no. 1 to 4, fairly submitted that in view of the enquiry conducted by the D.I.G. and his report dated 12th July, 2012 , it is thus proved that the candidature of respondents no. 5, 6 and 7 ought to have been rejected and ought not to have been considered for the post of "Bugler Constable". He further contended that in view of the report submitted by the D.I.G., the appointment of respondents no. 5, 6 and 7 abovenamed seems to be illegal and, therefore, action would be taken for removal of respondents no. 5, 6 and 7 applying the principle "the way they entered into service, the way they should be removed". He has further contended that the candidature of the petitioners shall be considered in accordance with law within a reasonable time, preferably within sixty days from today.
(3.) MR. Sujit Narayan Prasad, learned counsel for the petitioners fairly submits that let the present writ petition be disposed of in the light of the statements made by Mr. Ajit Kumar, learned Additional Advocate General appearing for respondents no. 1 to 4. In view of the above, the present writ petition stands disposed of with the direction that the respondents shall taken necessary and legal action against respondents no. 5, 6 and 7 and shall consider the candidature of the petitioners as stated by Mr. Ajit Kumar, learned Additional Advocate General. The report submitted to the Court in a sealed cover shall remain part of the record.;