( 1 ) SINCE the common issue is involved in all these three petitions, the same are being disposed of by this common judgment.

( 2 ) WHAT is challenged in these petitions is the order of dismissal passed by the respondent No. 1 herein on 24/07/1988 with immediate effect. While passing this dismissal order, the respondent No. 1 has dispensed with the inquiry in the purported exercise of the powers under sub-clause (b) of second proviso to clause (2) of Article 311 of the Constitution of India and the respondent No. 1 has also given reasons for dispensing with such inquiry.

( 3 ) THE brief facts, giving rise to the present petitions are that the petitioners are Unarmed Police Constables serving in Bhavnagar District Police Force, Bhavnagar. The charge levelled against the petitioners was that in 1987 they had indulged in promoting and inciting agitational activities in the police force of Gujarat State. On 3-4-1987 between 20. 00 to 20. 30 hours the petitioners and their other associates organised meeting in Police Headquarters, Bhavnagar and addressed them regarding the incident of police firing in Sandhiawad, Bhavnagar on 31-3-87 and induced them to accept the decision of the association if any action was taken against the policemen. A telegram was also sent to the DSP, Bhavnagar giving ultimatum that if any action was taken by the Government against the police the police association will take hard action. The authorities have therefore considered this action of the petitioners as an inducement to policemen to cause disaffection against the Government established by law and also instigated them to withhold their services and also to commit breach of discipline and thereby they have violated the provisions of Section 3 of Police (Incitement to Disaffection) Act, 1922.

( 4 ) IT was further alleged against the petitioners that on 16-5-1987 and 17-5-1987 the petitioners and their associates had put on black ribbons on uniform while on duty in response to a call of strike given by petitioners association at Ahmedabad in protest against non-fulfilment of demand of pay and eight-hour duty and thus violated the above provisions of the Act. It was further alleged that on 26-6-87, the petitioners had instigated local policemen to go on strike from 27. 6. 87 and in response to a call of strike given by Mahamandal at Ahmedabad in order to press for their demand of more pay and nonacceptance of pay-scales of all State employees. It was further alleged that the petitioners had also tried to contact S. T. staff at Bhavnagar to stop them to join police duties if the police strike materialised from 27. 6. 87. According to the respondent No. 1 the aforesaid activities of the petitioners constituted conduct so totally unbecoming of the member of the police force of the State which would render them unfit to be retained as such member and hence while exercising the powers vested in respondent No. 1 under Article 311 (2) (b) of the Constitution of India read with Proviso to Section 26 of the Bombay Police Act, 1951 and with Section 51 of the Bombay Police Act, 1951 the respondent No. 1 had passed the order dismissing the petitioners from service as members of the police force of the Gujarat State with immediate effect and the said orders are under challenge in this petition before this Court.

( 5 ) INITIALLY, the petitioners had filed appeal on 4/08/1988 against the impugned dismissal orders before the Deputy Inspector General of Police, Saurashtra South Range, Junagadh. However, the petitioners had apprehended that the respondent No. 2 before whom such appeals were filed would either delay the disposal of the appeal or he would dismiss the said appeal, under the influence of or under the instructions of the State Government. The petitioners have therefore filed the present writ petitions before this Court challenging the said order of dismissal.

( 6 ) IT is pertinent to note that though the petitions were filed some time in October 1