JUDGMENT

MADON, J. :— Six security guards .belonging to the Central Industrial Security Force (hereinafter referred to as "the Force") were dismissed from service by dispensing with the disciplinary inquiry under Clause (b) of Rule 37 of the Central Industrial Security Force Rules, 1969, read with Clause (b) of the second proviso to Article 311(2) of the Constitution. These provisions authorize a disciplinary authority to dispense with a disciplinary inquiry where it is satisfied, for some reason to be recorded in writing, that it is not reasonably practicable to hold the inquiry. The dismissed security guards filed writ petitions under Art. 226 of the Constitution in the Kerala High Court challenging their dismissal. These petitions were transferred to this Court under Art. 139A(1) of the Constitution as a number of other matters involving the interpretation of the second proviso to Art. 311(2) were pending in this Court. These other matters were disposed of by a Constitution Bench of this Court by a common judgment, namely, Union of India v. Tulsiram Patel (1985) 3 SCC 398.

2. The question which falls for determination in these Transferred Cases is whether it was not reasonably pr