Abhinava Upadhya, J. - (1.) Heard learned Counsel for the petitioner, and learned standing Counsel for the respondents. The main grievance of the petitioner is that his dismissal from service vide order dated 20.12.1993 is contrary to the provisions of law, and, therefore, is illegal. The facts in brief are that in the night of 9/10.08.1993, the petitioner was posted at Rauza Tiraha, Police Station Kotwali, District Ghazipur. From 8:00 p.m. upto 2:00 o'clock in the early morning, and in the night of 9/10.08.1993 about at 12.30 P.M. the C.O. City, Shri D.K. Chaudhary, was coming back from duty and found that the petitioner and one Shri Yogendra Pratap Shahi had stopped three trucks and the petitioner was found moving about at the back of the trucks. The truck driver made a complaint that the petitioner had taken Rs. 200/- each from the drivers of the three trucks. The C.O. City then frisked the petitioner and found Rs. 450/- in his pocket.
(2.) Upon the aforesaid charges an enquiry was instituted against the petitioner and a charge-sheet was given on 18.8.1993 and on 18.8.1993 an opportunity was given to the petitioner to submit reply to the charge-sheet. On 27.8.1993 the petitioner submitted his reply stating therein that detailed answer would be given after supplying the documents relied upon for framing the charges against the petitioner.
(3.) It appears that thereafter, an enquiry was conducted and enquiry report was submitted end a copy thereof was given to the petitioner wherein charges levelled were found to be proved. A show cause notice was issued proposing punishment of dismissal and thereafter an order of dismissal was passed dismissing the petitioner from service. Against the aforesaid order of dismissal, the petitioner preferred an appeal, which was dismissed vide order dated 7.8.1995. it appears that concealing the aforesaid facts the petitioner filed a writ petition being Civil Misc. Writ Petition No. 7752 of 1994 (Suresh Prasad Verma v. State of U.P. and others). This writ petition was dismissed on the ground of availability of alternative remedy of filing appeal. The petitioner thereafter, again filed an appeal, which was also dismissed on 28.4.2001. Thereafter, the revision filed by the petitioner was dismissed on 25" September. 2001. Aggrieved by the aforesaid order, the petitioner approached this Court by filing the present writ petition.;