AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
R.N. Prasad, J.—Heard learned counsel for the parties on the question of admission and stay both with consent. Learned counsel for the petitioner pointed out that the order, annexure 4, is bad in law. He raised several questions including the validity of provision of amendment in section 23 of the Bihar Act. He also pointed out that a Division Bench has also admitted C.W.J.C. No. 5411 of 1995 and stay has been granted.
Learned counsel for the respondents, however, says that provision of appeal has been made against such order. Therefore, the petitioner should approach the appellate authority.
Since the case has been admitted by Division Bench, I do not find any reason to accept the submission made by the learned counsel for the respondents.
This application will be heard.
Learned counsel for the State must file counter affidavit within a period of two months.
The operation of the order, annexure 4, is hereby stayed.
The petitioner shall be at liberty to make a motion before Hon''ble the Chief Justice for early hearing of this case. The I.A. is, accordingly, disposed of.