S.J.MUKHOPADHAYA, J. - (1.) IN all these cases, as common questions of law involved and in some of the cases, common order is under challenge, they were heard together and are being disposed of by this common judgment.
(2.) PETITIONERS , Krishna Nand Shukla and others have preferred writ petition W.P. (S) No. 1251 of 2003 against the order dated 24th February, 2003 passed by respondent -Deputy Commissioner, Palamau, whereby and where under, prayer of petitioners has been rejected. Further prayer has been made for a direction on the respondents not to change the final list of candidates, prepared on 24th April, 2001 for appointment under 5th respondent, the Bihar Caustic and Chemicals Limited, Palamau (hereinafter referred to as the 'Company ') and to set aside the list in which names of 6th to 13th respondents have been included for appointment. Petitioner, Sanjay Kumar Shukla has preferred writ petition W.P. (S) No. 1460 of 2003 and petitioner, Akhila Nand Shukla has preferred WP (S) No. 2349 of 2003. Both of them have also challenged the aforesaid order dated 24th February, 2003 passed by Deputy Commissioner, Palamau and prayed for similar direction on the respondents not to change the final list of candidates for appointment in the company.
(3.) PETITIONER , Gorakh Nath Shukla has preferred writ petition W.P. (S) No. 5449 of 2003 for commanding upon the respondents - Company to give employment to him in the light of order dated 24th February, 2003 passed by Deputy Commissioner, Palamau. In fact, the prayer made in this case is contrary to the prayer made in the aforesaid three writ petitions. From the facts pleaded by the petitioners in these cases, it appears that lands of various raiyats were acquired in pursuance of different land acquisition proceedings in favour of respondents -Company.;