The provisions of the Civil Services (Classification, Control and Appeal) Rules do not apply to members of the subordinate police force because their conditions of service are governed by the Indian Police Act and the Police Regulations.

( 1 ) THE petitioner was originally recruited as a constable in the U. P. police force but was later on promoted to be a head-constable after having completed the necessary training. In February 1955 he was posted in Shahjahanpur and on the 17th of that month he received an order of suspension. The suspension order was communicated to him telcphonically by the Kotwal, Shahja-hanpur. On the 7th of April 1955 a charge sheet was served upon him. He submitted his reply to the charges on or about the 17th of April 1955. The petitioner was departmentally tried under section 7 of the Indian Police Act. Sri R. D. Pandey, Superintendent of Police, Shahjahanpur. , recorded findings-against the petitioner, the concluding portion of which runs as follows :-

"in view of the seriousness of the charge and the fact that it has been proved beyond any shadow of doubt and the bad record of service and the fact that all sorts of punishments have had no effect on the party charged to reform him I feel that he is a thoroughly undesirable type incapable of reform. He is the type that brings a bad name to the police force and is responsible tor spoiling police and public relations. He is a slur on the force and a bad example to his subordinates and colleagues. In view of the above I find that no punishment less than dismissal from the Force will serve the ends of justice. I, therefore, call upon the party charged, H. C. Mukhtar Singh. to show cause within 10 days of the receipt of this finding why he should not be dismissed from the Force. A copy of this finding will be handed over to H. C. Mukhtar Singh, the party charged, free of cost. Sd. R. D, Pandey IPS. Superintendent of Police shahjahanpur, 10-7-55. "

( 2 ) THE petitioner filed a reply to the show cause notice mentioned above on or about the 19th july 1955 and on 2nd of August 1955 he was dismissed by the Superintendent of Police. He filed an appeal before the Deputy Inspector General of Police in November 1955. The D.. G. rejected the appeal by his order dated 6th of March 1956, Thereafter the petitioner filed a petition before the Inspector General of Police who rejected the same on 29th of October 1956. The petitioner thereafter applied for certified copies of the various orders which he received on the 15th of February 1957. Thereafter the present petition was filed in this Court. The grounds taken in the petition are that the charges levelled against the petitioner amounted to the cognizable offence of lurking housetrespass by alight and the proceedings under Section 7 of the Police Act were wholly without jurisdiction because no first information report was recorded against the petitioner and a case was not registered against him and that the petitioner had not a reasonable opportunity of showing cause because he was not allowed to lead evidence in defence. Mr. Misra, the learned counsel for the petitioner, later on made an application tor adding some grounds which are to the effect that the provisions of Rule 55 of the Civil Services (Classification, Control and Appeal) Rules are applicable to his case and inasmuch as the same were not applied in his case there has been no proper enquiry and in any case the provisions of the Police Regulations are ultra vires inasmuch as it is open to a Superintendent of Police to discriminate between two members of the police force by applying in the case of one the provisions of the Police Regulations, which are more onerous than the provisions of Rule 55 of the Civil Services (Classification, Control and Appeal) Rules (hereinafter called the Rules), and by applying in the case of the other the provisions of the Rules which are more generous.

( 3 ) A counter-affidavit has been filed on behalf of the State which has been sworn by Sri Girraj singh, Circle Inspector. It is in the counter-affidavit that on the night between 16th and 17th february, 1955, one Radhey Lal reported to Sri Aisar Hussain, Deputy Superintendent of Police, shahja-hanpur