MANOJ KUMAR RAI Vs. STATE OF UP

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard learned Counsel for the petitioner and learned Standing Counsel for the State. The petitioner has filed the instant writ petition assailing the validity and correctness of the order dated 8.1.2008 passed by D.I.G. Allahabad Range, Allahabad dismissing the petitioner from service invoking the provisions of Rule 8(2)(b) of the U.P. Subordinate Police Officers Punishment and Appeal Rules, 1991 [hereinafter referred to as the Rules, 1991 for the sake of brevity].

(2.) Learned Counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner was always appreciated by the higher authorities for his goods character, utmost, devotion and dedication in the department but the impugned orders of dismissal of petitioner's services are not based on the correct facts of the case vis- -vis the same are violative of Article 311(2) of the Constitution of India. He submits that the impugned order is not only contrary to the procedure as transcribed under Rules, 1991 but it also clearly contrary to the provisions of Article 311 as provided under the Constitution of India.

(3.) He has further submitted that several writ petitions of identical nature have been allowed by this Court and the order of dismissal has been quashed. The case of the petitioner is on same footing. The legal proposition and the judgment of this Court in various writ petitions of identical nature has not been disputed by the Standing Counsel.