- (1.) DEVI Prasad Singh, J. Affidavits have been exchanged.
(2.) WITH the consent of parties' Counsel the petition is decided finally at the admission stage. The controversy relates to dismissal from service in pursuance of provi sions contained in Rule 8 (2) (b) of U. P. Police Officers of the Subordinate Ranks (Punishment and Appeal) Rules, 1991 (hereinafter referred to as the Rules ). Ques tion involved in the present writ petition is when a police personnel may be dis missed from service, without holding regular inquiry in pursuance to Rule 8 (2) (b) of the Rules read with Article 311 (2) of the Constitution. The brief facts of the present case are summarised as under :
(3.) THE petitioner was appointed as Constable on 26. 12. 1999 and he was posted at Lucknow after training. According to petitioner's Counsel, he performed duties in various districts of U. P. as Lucknow, Sitapur, Mahoba and Unnao. Ac cording to petitioner's Counsel, during the entire tenure of service the petitioner has not faced any departmental proceedings, or was punished. While posted at Unnao, he obtained leave on 3. 9. 2003 and continued till 30. 12. 2003 i. e. , 190 days. THE period of which the petitioner was on leave, was reported to be unauthorised absence from duty hence, under provisions of Rule 8 (2) (b) of the Rules, the petitioner was dismissed, from service by the order dated 10. 12. 2006 by the Superintendent of Police, Unnao. THE provisions of Rule 8 (2) (b) of the Rules are analogous to Article 311 (2) of the Constitution of India. For conve nience the Rule 8' (2) (b) of the Rules is reproduced as under : 8. Dismissal and removal.- (2) No Police Officer shall be dismissed, removed or reduced in rank except after proper inquiry and disciplinary pro ceedings as contemplated by these rules : Provided that this rule shall not apply- (b) Where the authority empowered to dismiss or remove a person or to reduce him jn 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" 5. THE plain reading of Rule 8 (2) (b) of the Rules shows that a police em ployee can be dismissed from service without holding any inquiry if the authority is satisfied that for some reason to be recorded by that authority in writing, that it is not reasonably practicable to hold departmental enquiry. On account of absence from duty, the Superintendent of Police Unnao by the impugned order dated 10. 12. 2006 contained in Annexure 1 to the writ petition, has dismissed the petitioner from service. At the time when the petitioner was dismissed from service, he was holding the promotional post of Head Constable in civil police in police line, Unnao. It has been recorded that the petitioner was unauthorisedly absent from duty for 110 days. It appears that the order of dis missal was passed in pursuance to Rule 8 (2) (b) of the Rules during the period he was absent from duty.;