Pramath Patnaik, J. - (1.) In all these writ applications, the facts are more or less identical and common question of law is involved, therefore, with the consent of the respective counsels, all the writ petitions are heard analogously and disposed of by this common order/judgment.
(2.) The petitioners, in the aforesaid writ applications, being aggrieved by the impugned order of dismissal, dated 01.06.2008, passed by the Respondent No. 5, Senior Superintendent of Police, Ranchi being confirmed by the appellate authority i.e. respondent No. 3 vide order dated 23.10.2008, the petitioners have been constrained to approach this Court invoking extraordinary jurisdiction of this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for redressal of their grievances.
(3.) Sans details, the facts as disclosed in the writ applications is that the petitioners were posted to guard, one life convict, namely, Anil Sharma, while undergoing treatment in R.I.M.S., Ranchi. Since the said accused fled away from the custody of the petitioners, an F.I.R. was lodged in Bariatu Police Station on 23.05.2008. It has been averred in the writ application that one Arun Kumar, Officer -in -charge of Bariatu P.S. under whose jurisdiction, the RIMS is situated, was also suspended for the self same charges but later on, his suspension was revoked, as revealed from Annexure -2 to the writ application as per the averments made in the writ application. The respondents without issuance of any show -cause notice or without initiating any departmental proceeding, straightway on the basis of Article 311 (2) (b) of the Constitution of India proceeded against the petitioners on the basis of conjectures and surmises and imaginary grounds on the allegations that the petitioners helped the accused, Anil Sharma in fleeing away from the Police custody and passed the order of dismissal from services.;