PAPPU KUMAR Vs. STATE OF MIZORAM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By this Application under Article 226 of the Constitution, the petitioner has challenged the order dated 29.11.95 discharging him from service:.

(2.) I have heard Mr.G. Raju, learned counsel for the petitioner as well as Mr. T. Vaiphei, learned Assistant Advocate General for the State Respondents. I have also considered the records of the case.

(3.) The Petitioner Pappu Kumar along with five others was appointed as a constable in the First Battalion Mizoram Armed Police by an order dated 14.11.95 (Annexure-P. 1). After a few days the Commandant who appointed him was replaced by another Commandant. After 15 days of his appointment, the new Commandant (Respondent No. 4) discharged him from service by the impugned order dated 29/11/95 (Annexure-P.2) which reads as under: