A.P.Sahi, J. - (1.) The petitioner has prayed for quashing of the order dated 19.10.2005 whereby the services of the petitioner have been terminated under Rule 7 (3) of the U.P. Police Officers and Employees (Punishment and Appeal) Rules, 1991.
(2.) I have heard learned Counsel for the petitioner and the learned standing counsel for the respondents and have also perused the affidavits exchanged between the parties.
(3.) The petitioner has been charged of not being diligent in his duties and even otherwise guilty of insubordination and mis behavior. The impugned order records that the petitioner had been deployed on election duty but he refused to proceed on his duty and also did not obtain arms for proceeding to the place where he was deputed. It is also indicated that the petitioner v\as half dressed at the point of time when the Circle Officer intercepted him in order to see that he is deployed at his place where he has been asked to perform his duties. It is stated in the order that the petitioner had refused to obey the orders of Sri Anand and therefore, was entitled for the punishment.;