1. Impugned in this petition is order No. P, VIII, 2/04,137, EC,II dated 13th December 2004, passed by respondent No. 5 (Commandant 137 Bn CRPF Musanboni, East. Singhbhum, Jharkhand) whereby, the petitioner has been dismissed from the services and his name has been struck off from the rolls of his unit.

2. The order, impugned has been assailed on several grounds but the ground which was strenuously urged by the learned counsel for the petitioner pertains to the alleged violation of principles of natural justice in holding the enquiry and the non-compliance with the provisions of Rule 27 of Central Reserve Police Forces Rules 1994 (for brevity, the rules of 1994) which lays down the procedure, to be followed in the disciplinary proceedings. Before adverting to the grounds of challenge, a brief look at the facts may be necessary.

3. The petitioner was appointed as Constable in the Central Reserve Police Force (CRPF) on 10.06.1996. On transfer of the petitioner to the newly raised unit from 98th Bn. CRPF, the petitioner was posted to 137 Bn. CRPF on 3rd September 2001. On 16th September 2001, at about 0430 Hrs, the petitioner left the unit without giving any prior intimation to his immediate seniors and without any permission from the competent authority. The petitioner did not turn up to join back for duties even after he was called upon to do so by the respondents by way of different communications, issued on 16.09.2001, 17.09.01. 01.01.2002, 08.01.2001, 18.06.2002 & 09.09.2002. Getting no response from the petitioner, the respondents initiated departmental enquiry against the petitioner and subsequently dismissed him from the services, w.e.f. 28th February 2002 vide order No. P. VIII-25/2002-EC-II-137.

4. The petitioner preferred an appeal against the dismissal order before the DIGP, CRPF, Jalandhar (Appellate Authority). The appeal was accepted and the petitioner was reinstated to the service, w.e.f., the date of reporting to the services vide order No. J.II. 1/2002-DA-I dated 14.06.2002, passed by the appellate authority. Despite the order of reinstatement, petitioner did not report for duties despite the fact that he was called upon to do so vide order dated 09.02.2002. Later on it came to the notice of the respondents that the Delhi Police had arrested the petitioner for commission of offence punishable under Section NDPS Act, as he was found to carry 225 grams of Charas. In the aforesaid case, petitioner was later on granted bail and released on 13th September 2003. The petitioner reported to the unit for duties on 8th April 2004 and was taken on the strength of unit in terms of order dated 07.07.2004. He was reinstated into services as per the directions of appellate authority. It may be noteworthy that appellate authority while accepting the appeal of the petitioner directed his reinstatement but had however, directed to conduct a de novo enquiry after affording him an opportunity of being heard.

5. In compliance to the orders of the appellate authority a de novo enquiry was conducted and the petitioner was found guilty of charges and was consequently dismissed from the services, w.e.f. 13th December 2004 vide order, impugned in this writ petition.

6. Aggrieved, the petitioner served a legal notice upon the Director General of CRPF, New Delhi (respondent No. 2 herein), dated 25th January 2005, seeking his indulgence in the matter for setting aside the order of his dismissal. The petitioner getting no response from the respondent No. 2, approached this Court by way of instant writ petition.

7. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties and perused the original record of enquiry.

8. The facts as noted above are not much in dispute. The petitioner was a Constable, substantively appointed in the CRPF. He left his unit without intimation to his superiors and without permission from the competent authority and remained absent from the duties. The petitioner was intimated time and again to join the duties but he