NARENDRA PRASAD RAI Vs. STATE OF U P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) BHARATI Sapru, J. Heard learned Counsel for the petitioner and the learned standing Counsel for the respondents.

(2.) THE petitioner has made a prayer seeking writ of certiorari quashing the impugned orders dated 19-6- 1993 and 2-3-1992 passed by the respondents No. 3 and 2 respectively (Annexures 1 and 2 to the writ petition ). THE first the order of removal was passed by the Superintendent of Police and the second is the order passed in appeal by the D. I. G. (Police ).

(3.) SUCH being the case, the petitioner is justified in saying that the impugned order dated 19-6-1993 has been passed in violation of the provisions of Section 8 (2) (b) of the Rules aforesaid. The consequent order has been passed without holding any enquiry is also therefore vitiated. The petitioner is clearly entitled to the protection granted under Article 311 (2) of the Constitution of India.