Shishir Kumar, J. - (1.) HEARD learned Counsel for the Petitioners Shri Vijay Gautam and learned Standing Counsel for the State.
(2.) LEARNED Counsel for the Respondents submitted that since pure legal question has been raised in this matter, he does not propose to file any counter affidavit and would make his submission and therefore, the writ petition may be heard and decided finally at this stage. With the consent of learned Counsel for the parties, this writ petition is being disposed of finally under the Rules of the Court.
(3.) THE Petitioners have filed the instant writ petition assailing the validity and correctness of the order dated 13.09.2007 passed by Respondent No. 3, the Superintendent of Police, Ballia dismissing the Petitioners from service invoking the provisions of Rule 8(2) (b) of the U.P. Subordinate Police Officers Punishment & Appeal Rules, 1991 [hereinafter referred to as the Rules, 1991 for the sake of brevity].;