JUDGMENT

 Leave granted.

2. For the disposal of the point in controversy the facts in C.A.No. 1088/95 @ SLP(C) No. 9649/93 lie in a short compass are as under:

The respondent, Jagdish Chander, was appointed as a constable on October 30, 1985. Since he was absent from duty from April 20, 1992, to May 15, 1992, by proceedings dated 1-1-1992, he was discharged from service as a constable, exercising the power under rule 12.21 of the Punjab Police Rules, (for short, the Rules). The respondent impugned its validity in CPW No. 12183/92. The High Court by its order dated 14-1-1993 allowed the writ petition, set aside the order and directed the appellant to reinstate the respondent with continuity of the service and consequential benefits. Thus, this appeal by special leave.

Rule 12.21 reads thus:

"A constable who is found unlikely to prove an efficient police officer may be discharged by the Superintendent at any time within three years of enrolment. There shall be no appeal against an order of discharge under this rule".

A reading of this rule would indicate that the Superintendent of Police, before expiry of three years from the date of enrolment of the police officer into the service, has b