JUDGMENT

PATHAK, J.:— This appeal by special leave arises out of a writ petition filed by a police officer aggrieved by the termination of his services.

2. The appellant was a temporary Sub-Inspector of Police. He was posted at Shahjahanpur in 1969. The Superintendent of Police, Shahjahanpur commenced disciplinary proceedings against the appellant on the charge that he had violated R. 29 of the U. P. Government Servants Conduct Rules, 1958 inasmuch as without prior permission of the Government he had contracted a second marriage in November, 1964 while his first wife was alive. The charge was denied by the appellant. The Superintendent of Police recorded evidence. But at this stage the Deputy Inspector General of Police Bareilly made an order on March 12, 1970, quashing the disciplinary proceedings on the ground that the offence had been committed at Pithoragarh, situated in a different police range, and therefore the proceedings taken against the appellant were incompetent.

3. Meanwhile, on March 8, 1970, the Inspector General of Police, Uttar Pradesh, had issued a letter to all Superintendents of Police in the State directing them to submit a list of Sub-Inspectors whose reputation