This writ petition by Shri R. K. Tomalsana Singh under Articles 226, 227 and 311(2) of the Constitution of India raises the question about the validity of order dated 27th July 1951 issued by the Chief Commissioner of Manipur in his capacity as Inspector General of Police, Manipur. By that order the Inspector General of Police directed that the rules contained in parts I to V of Assam Police Manual shall apply to the Manipur Police including the Manipur Rifles.

2. The petitioner Tomalsana Singh joined the Manipur Police Service as a constable in the year 1952 and was promoted as Sub-Inspector of Police in course of time. He was placed under suspension by an order dated 26th October 1964 by the Superintendent of Police, Manipur, with a view to hold departmental enquiry against him on the charge that he had absented himself from duty from 23-9-1964 to 24-10-1964 without taking leave while he was posted as Officer-in-charge of the Police Station, Tamenglong. Before that enquiry could conclude, another departmental proceeding was initiated against him on the charge that he had failed to hand over Rs. 145/-, lying in trust with him as Officer-in-charge of the Police Station, Tamenglong, to his successor -in-office when he laid down the charge on 2-11-1964 pursuant to the suspension order dated 26th October 1964. Tomalsana Singh submitted his written statement denying the charge of defalcation. Thereafter, an enquiry was held respecting that charge by Shri Ch. Nandakishore Singh, the Deputy Superintendent of Police of Manipur. The Enquiry Officer held in his report submitted to the Superintendent of Police that the charge had been proved against Tomalsana Singh. The Superintendent of Police, thereupon, issued a notice to Tomalsana Singh calling upon him to show cause why he should not be dismissed from service. Tomalsana Singh submitted a representation against the proposed punishment to the Superintendent of Police, but the latter dismissed him from service by an order dated 11th May, 1965. Aggrieved by his dismissal, the petitioner filed an appeal before the Chief Commissioner, Manipur, but the latter rejected the same on 17th August 1966. In the writ petition filed on 27-2-1967, Tomalsana Singh challenged the constitutional validity of his dismissal.

3. The principal grounds urged in support of the prayer made were:

(i) That the State Government had not framed any rules under Section 7 of the Police Act, 1861, and as such no disciplinary proceeding could be initiated against him;

(ii) That the Assam Police Manual had not been extended to the Union Territory of Manipur by a competent authority and as such the enquiry held against him in terms of that Manual is vitiated;

(iii) That Shri Ch. Nandakishore Singh, the Deputy Superintendent of Police, had not been appointed as the Enquiry Officer and as such the enquiry held by him was invalid; and

(iv) That on 29-3-1964 the petitioner requested Shri Nandakishore Singh for furnishing him copies of certain documents which the prosecution wanted to rely upon against him, but Shri Nandakishore Singh refused to furnish him those copies.

This last act of the Enquiry Officer, it was pleaded, was illegal because it violated the principles of natural justice as also the provisions of Article 311 of the Constitution. The petitioner alleged specifically that the Central Civil Services (Classification, Control and Appeal) Rules of 1957, hereinafter called the 1957 Rules, do not apply to the members of the Manipur Police for the purposes of departmental proceedings.

4. The respondents traversed the pleadings of Tomalsana Singh and opposed his contention that his dismissal from service was illegal or unconstitutional. It was asserted that Shri Nandakishore Singh had been appointed as an Enquiry Officer by the Superintendent of Police by an order dated 15-2-1967, and that Parts I to V of the Assam Police Manual were and are still in force in the Union Territory of Manipur. It was pleaded that the enqu