JUDGMENT

B.P. Jeevan Reddy, J.-Leave granted. Heard the counsel for the parties.

2. The respondent, a Sub-Inspector of Police in the service of the Administration of the Union Territory of Chandigarh, has been dismissed from service by the Senior Superintendent of Police, Union Territory, Chandigarh. The Senior Superintendent of Police dispensed with the enquiry invoking proviso (b) to clause (2) of Article 311 of the Constitution of India and made the order of dismissal on 5th July, 1991. An appeal preferred by the respondent was dismissed by the Inspector General of Police on 30th September, 1991 whereupon the respondent approached the Central Administrative Tribunal, Chandigarh. The Tribunal found, following its earlier order dated June 2, 1995 in O.A. No. 232/Ch/94 (Baljit Singh v. Chandigarh Administration), that the ground upon which the Senior Superintendent has dispensed with the enquiry is not sustainable in law. Accordingly, the Tribunal quashed the order of dismissal and the appellate order and directed the administration to reinstate the respondent with all attendant benefits.

3. The order of dismissal reads as follows:

"ORDER

Whereas SI Mohinder Singh No. CHG/1 was holding