Sudhir Agarwal, J. - (1.) The only submission advanced by the learned Counsel for the Petitioner is that the order impugned in this petition is ex facie illegal showing total non application of mind on the part of the disciplinary authority in dismissing the Petitioner from service under proviso to Rule 8 (2)(b) of U.P. Police officers of Subordinate Ranks ( Punishment And Appeal) Rules, 1991 without holding any enquiry observing that there is no possibility of collection of evidence and there is no improvement in the Petitioner's service.
(2.) There is nothing on record to show that the disciplinary authority applied its mind to the factum that departmental enquiry is impracticable. The possibility of non -collection of evidence by itself cannot make the enquiry impracticable as contemplated in Clause 8(2) (b) of the aforesaid Rules of 1991, which is pari materia to Article 311(2) , which reads as under: No such person as aforesaid shall be dismissed or removed or reduced in rank except after an inquiry in which he has been informed of the charges against him and given a reasonable opportunity of being heard in respect of those charges.
(3.) Provided that where it is proposed after such inquiry, to impose upon him any such penalty, such penalty may be imposed on the basis of the evidence adduced during such inquiry and it shall not be necessary to give such person any opportunity of making representation on the penalty proposed:;