V.K. Shukla,J. - (1.) PETITIONER had been performing and discharging duties as constable with civil police. At the relevant point of time he was posted at police station Charthawal, District Muzaffarnagar. On 05.07.1994, petitioner was relieved for proceeding to the office of the Senior Prosecuting Officer, Muzaffarnagar; petitioner, instead of going to the said place, disappeared and returned back on 24.07.1994. Thereafter, again petitioner was absent from duty without any leave with effect from 19.08.1994 to 15.09.1994 and again with effect from 16.09.1994 to 19.09.1994. For this misconduct committed by the petitioner, show cause notice was issued to him as to why the period of absence be not converted into leave without pay and why censor entry be not awarded to him. PETITIONER submitted his reply, which was found unsatisfactory, and the order was passed directing to treat the petitioner's absence as leave without pay and order of adverse entry was also passed. Appeal preferred by the petitioner has been dismissed; thereafter, review also met the same fate. Thereafter, present writ petition has been filed. Counter affidavit has been filed on behalf of the State and the action taken has been justified. Learned counsel for the petitioner does not intend to file rejoinder affidavit and requests that the matter may be heard and finally decided. Learned counsel for the petitioner, contended with vehemence that in the present case, it is matter of double jeopardy, as for one misconduct two punishments have been awarded, as such action taken cannot be justified. Countering the said submission, learned Standing Counsel, on the other hand, contended that there appears some misconception in the mind of the petitioner, as particular of double jeopardy is not at all attracted in the present case. The two orders passed operate in separate field and both are permissible in law, as such writ petition deserves to be dismissed. After respective arguments have been advanced, factual position which emerges in the present case, is that without any leave and without any information, the petitioner illegally absented himself, for which show cause notice was issued, to which reply was filed by the petitioner. After considering the reply authorities in their wisdom found that on the part of the petitioner there was misconduct and opinion was formed to convert the period of absence into leave without pay and for violation of the provisions as contained under U.P. Police Officers of Subordinate Rank (Punishment and Appeal) Rules, 1991, censor entry was awarded to the petitioner, as the petitioner had absented himself for insufficient cause. Conversion of period of absence into leave without pay is not punishment, inasmuch as it is not one of the punishments provided for under the aforementioned Rules. In this background this administrative decision cannot be treated to be punishment and this order was passed to streamline the things, otherwise there would have been break in service. The order of censor entry is one of the prescribed punishments under 1991 Rules and the same can be awarded after show cause notice is given. In the present case, show cause notice was given and then as the cause furnished was found insufficient, in this background opinion has been formed to award adverse entry. The said action does not suffer from any infirmity. The action taken is within the framework of law and it is not a case of double jeopardy. There is complete misconception in the mind of the petitioner. Consequently, writ petition as has been framed and drawn is dismissed.;