(1.) THE above writ appeals have been filed by the Union of India and others against the common order of learned single Judge, allowing three writ petitions viz. , W. P. Nos. 15071 of 1988, 5601 of 1989 and 12213 of 1990 and in all these writ appeals, the respondent is same.
(2.) THE respondent herein filed the Writ Petition No. 15071 of 1988, praying the Court to issue a writ of certiorarified mandamus, calling for the records relating to the enquiry, from the appellants, quash the enquiry proceedings and the order of the 1st appellant made in VI 5014/19/87 (Landr) dated September 23, 1988 as illegal and consequently direct the 1st respondent to change the Enquiry Officer and hold the enquiry afresh at a place other than Seetalpour and Sidhabari. The writ petition was allowed and the appellants have filed the appeal viz. , W. A. No. 767 of 1998. Writ Petition No. 5601 of 1989 has been filed, praying the Court to issue a writ, calling for the records from the appellants 1 to 3 relating to charge memo No. V15014/ 6/87/landr of the 1st appellant and quash the same as illegal. Here again, the writ petition was allowed and the writ appeal filed against this order is W. A. No. 768 of 1998. The prayer in W. P. No. 12213 of 1990 is to issue a writ of certiorari, calling for the concerned records from the appellants 1 and 2 relating to the impugned order No. E-28014/ 14/90/ Pers. II/1069, dated June 29, 1990 and quash the same. The writ appeal filed as against the order in this writ petition is, Writ Appeal No. 769 of 1998.
(3.) THE necessity for passing common judgment is that, some of the observations /discussions and findings in the first two writ appeals will have a direct relevance to the 3rd writ appeal.