Hon’ble Sudhir Agarwal, J.—Heard Sri Ashok Khare, learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Standing Counsel for the respondents.

2. This writ petition is directed against order dated 10.1.2007 (Annexure 20 to the writ petition) passed by the Inspector General of Police, PAC, U.P. Lucknow (respondent No. 2) rejecting the revision of petitioner which was filed against order dated 16.1.1999 dismissing appeal of the petitioner against order of dismissal dated 19.5.1998.

3. Facts giving rise to present dispute are as under:

4. Petitioner was appointed as Constable in Provincial Armed Constabulary (P.A.C.) U.P. in the year 1988 and was posted in 39th Battalion P.A.C., Mirzapur. In year 1994 he was posted at 4th Battalion P.A.C., Allahabad. FIR dated 28.5.1997 was lodged against cleaner of vehicle No. 70-E-8655 of 4th Battalion P.A.C. bearing Case Crime No. 315/97 under Sections 279, 337, 338 IPC. Later on it was converted into Section 279/304-A IPC alleging that on 28.5.1997 one Himmat Singh got injured in his chest due to rash and negligent driving of vehicle. After investigation, police filed charge-sheet under Sections 279/304-B IPC. Another report was lodged on 28.5.1997 by driver Gama Yadav, Constable of aforesaid vehicle, against the mob under Section 147, 336, 341, 427 IPC alleging that the aforesaid vehicle was driven by Constable Saleem and he dashed Himmat Singh who sustained injuries, and mob assaulted Gama Yadav and his vehicle and damaged it. The matter was closed pursuant to Final Report submitted by police which was accepted by the Court.

5. Trial No. 315/97 proceeded and ultimately the Judicial Magistrate-, Allahabad acquitted the petitioner vide judgment dated 5.8.2002. However, a departmental enquiry was initiated against petitioner placing him under suspension on 2.6.1997 on the allegation that at about 8:30 p.m. on 28.5.1997 petitioner, while driving himself vehicle No. 70-E/8655, dashed a person near Kanhayeepur and ran away from the spot leaving vehicle and when driver reached the spot, public assaulted him and also damaged the vehicle.

6. A Preliminary enquiry was conducted by Sri K.N. Dubey, Assistant Commandant, I 4th Battalion P.A.C. about the said incident who submitted report on 16.9.1997 recommending regular departmental enquiry against petitioner. Charge-sheet was issued on 14.1.1998 which was replied by petitioner on 3.2.1998. After conclusion of oral enquiry, report was submitted by enquiry officer on 16.4.1998 holding petitioner guilty and recommended punishment of dismissal. Disciplinary authority thereafter passed order of dismissal on 19.5.1998. Petitioner’s appeal dated 14.6.1998 was rejected by appellate authority i.e. the Deputy Inspector General of Police, P.A.C., Kanpur Section, Kanpur vide order dated 16.1.1999. His revision was rejected by revisional authority i.e respondent No. 2 vide order 7.8.1999.

7. After acquittal in criminal case on 5.8.2002, petitioner filed an application dated 26.10.2002 requesting for his reinstatement in view of acquittal. The aforesaid application was rejected by respondent No. 2 on 14.1.2003 whereafter petitioner filed writ petition No. 15699 of 2003. This Court vide order dated 8.1.2004 disposed of writ petition with observations as under:

“The report of the enquiry officer in the present case has not been brought on record. The order of the Disciplinary Authority does not indicate clearly is that evidence has been relied upon in the departmental proceedings and, therefore, it cannot be decided here whether the evidence in the departmental proceedings and the criminal trial was common without there being a variance.

However, the decision of the Supreme Court is the law of the land and has to be followed not only by this Court but also by all administrative authorities. Therefore, the order dated 27.1.2003 rejecting the review application is set aside. The respondent No. 2 will examine the matter again in the light of the aforesaid Supreme Court deci