(1.) THE applicant was a Circle-Inspector of Police but was dismissed by the Inspector-General of Police on the 29th April ]949. The applicant preferred an appeal from the order of the Inspector-General of Police before the Provincial Government which was dismissed on the 24th September 1949. He preferred a memorial to the Government on the 6th November 1949, which was likewise rejected on the 27th February 1950. Finally he made an application to the Government for the grant of compassionate allowance. This. application was rejected on the 6th December 1950. The applicant has, therefore, come up to this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution.
(2.) IT is urged by way of preliminary objection by the learned Additional Government Pleader that the dismissal of the applicant having taken place before the Constitution and the order relating to his dismissal having attained finality before the commencement of the Constitution, the powers conferred on this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution cannot be exercised in favour of the applicant. On behalf of the applicant it is said that his dismissal was ordered in contravention of the provisions of the Government of India Act, 1935; that the order of dismissal was a nullity that it must therefore be treated as a scrap of paper and that, but for that order, the applicant would have still continued to be in service and so he was entitled to move this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution. We do not think it necessary to decide. these points because the grounds on which the dismissal of the applicant is challenged are not sustainable.
(3.) THE grounds on which the dismissal is challenged are that the applicant was not given an opportunity to show cause against his dismissal after the Inspector-General of Police had come to the conclusion that he ought to be dismissed and that before dismissing the applicant it was incumbent upon the Government to consult the Public Service Commission but there was a failure to do so.