Ashok Bhushan, J. - (1.) Heard counsel for the petitioner and learned standing counsel Counter and rejoinder affidavits have been exchanged between the parties with the consent of the parties the writ petition is being finally disposed of.
(2.) By this writ petition, the petitioner has prayed for quashing the order dated 21st October, 2000 passed by Superintendent of Police dismissing the petitioner from service dispensing holding of the enquiry under the provisions of U.P. Police Officers of the Subordinate Ranks (Punishment and Appeal) Rules, 1991 (hereinafter referred to as the Rules) and the appellate order dated 15th February, 2001 dismissing the appeal filed by the petitioner.
(3.) Learned counsel for the petitioner challenging the orders contended that no reasons have been given for dispensing holding of the enquiry and dismissal for the petitioner invoking the power under Rules 8(2) (b) of the Rules. The submission of counsel for the petitioner is that no reasons having been recorded for dispensing holding of the enquiry invoking of power under Rule 8(2)(b) is unjustified. He has placed reliance on judgment of this Court reported in (1991)1 S.C.C. 362; Jaswant Singh v. State of Punjab and Ors., Judgments of this Court reported in 1996(1) A.W.C. 245; Balveer Singh v. State of U.P. and Ors., (1994)3 UPLBEC 1717; Deep Barain v. Deputy Inspector General of Police, Gorakhpur and Ors. and 1998(1) UPLBEC 638; Brijendra Singh Yadav v. State of U.P. and Ors.;