- (1.) Heard Mr. Jitendra Singh, learned Counsel for the petitioners as well as Mr. Sanjay Bhasin, learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel for respondents.
(2.) The petitioners have assailed the judgment and order dated 12.05.2011 passed by the State Public Service Tribunal, Lucknow in Claim Petition No. 1089 of 2004 mainly on the ground that the order of punishment had been passed in exercise of power provided in Rule 8(2)(b) of U.P. Police Officers of the Subordinate Ranks (Punishment & Appeal) Rules, 1991 whereas no reasons were recorded by the disciplinary authority as to why the inquiry was not reasonably practicable. "Rule 8(2) provides "No Police Officer shall be dismissed, removed or reduced in rank except after proper inquiry and disciplinary proceedings as contemplated by these rules: Provided that this rule shall not apply- (a).................. (b) Where the authority empowered to dismiss or remove a person or to reduce him in rank is satisfied that for some reason to be recorded by that authority in writing, it is not reasonably practicable to hold such enquiry, or (c) .................."
(3.) It is a case of absconding, one accused Rajulala alias Kamlesh ran away from the petitioners custody, the petitioners had taken away the said accused to the Court of Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Chitrakoot and produced him, whereas while they were returning to Fatehpur they stayed at Krishna Lodge for dinner from where the accused fled away from the petitioners custody along with staingun magazine. A preliminary inquiry was conducted in which it was found that petitioners had come in contact of accused Rajulala who was dacoit having a long criminal history.;