- (1.) PETITIONER who are two in number are employed as constable in Civil Police of the State of U. P. They are aggrieved by an order passed by the Senior Superintendent of Police, Agra dated 13. 3. 2008 where under in exercise of power under Rule 8 (2) (b) of the Uttar Pradesh Police Officers of the Subordinate Ranks (Punishment and Appeal) Rules, 1991 (hereinafter referred to as the Rules, 1991), a decision has been taken to dispense with the departmental enquiry and to dismiss the petitioner as has been noticed.
(2.) COUNSEL for the petitioner with reference to the judgment of this Court in the case of Raghunath Singh v. State of U. P. and others, 2007 1 ADJ 143 as well as in view of the Division Bench judgment of this Court in the case of state of U. P. and others v. Chandrika Prasad, 2006 1 ESC 374 contends that no reason recorded for arriving at a conclusion that it was practically impossible to hold an enquiry in respect of the charge as noticed in the order. In absence of reasons the impugned order cannot be legally sustained.
(3.) STANDING Counsel on behalf of the State respondents submits that in the facts of the case, it would be in the fitness of things that the impugned order may be quashed and the matter may be remanded to the authority concerned to hold the departmental enquiry and to pass an order in a time bound manner. Counsel for the parties agree that the writ petition be disposed of at this stage of the proceedings without calling for any affidavits.;