JUDGMENT :

J.J. MUNIR, J.

1. This writ petition has been preferred by Hassandeen, once a Constable (General Duty) with the Central Industrial Security Force (for short ‘the CISF’) who has been dismissed from service by the Group Commandant, CISF Group Headquarters, Allahabad vide order dated 11.04.2012. This order has been affirmed in appeal by the Deputy Inspector General of Police, CISF, Allahabad vide order dated 14th August, 2012 and further upheld in revision by the Inspector General, North Sector, CISF, New Delhi on the 3rd of January, 2014 by an order of that date.

2. This is a case where the order of dismissal from service has been passed against the petitioner by the Disciplinary Authority in the exercise of powers under Rule 39 (ii) of the Central Industrial Security Force Rules, 2001 (for short ‘the Rules’) without holding an inquiry on grounds recorded in writing in the order impugned that it is not reasonably practicable to hold it.

3. The facts giving rise to this petition are:

The petitioner was selected and appointed to the CISF as a Constable (General Duty) (for short ‘Constable GD’) in the year 1999. He was posted in the Fourth Battalion, Government Opium Factory, Ghazipur as Constable GD, CISF Unit, Ghazipur. During the period of his posting at the CISF Unit, Ghazipur, a First Information Report (for short ‘the FIR’) came to be lodged by the Station House Officer, Police Station Jaitpura, District Varanasi against the petitioner, besides another ten accused, giving rise to Crime No. 54 of 2012, under Section 8/22 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (for short ‘NDPS Act’) Police Station Jaitpura, District Varanasi. The FIR aforesaid was lodged on 29.02.2012. The petitioner was arrested by the Police in connection with the said crime on 17.03.2012 and remanded to judicial custody. The Group Commandant, CISF Group Headquarters, Allahabad was informed of the fact by the Senior Sub-Inspector, Police Station Jaitpura, District Varanasi by his letter of 18th March, 2012. In consequence, by an order dated 18.03.2012, the petitioner was placed under suspension by the Group Commandant w.e.f. 17.03.2012. On the 11th April, 2012, the Group Commandant proceeded to dismiss the petitioner from service invoking his powers under Rule 39(ii) of the Rules, without holding an inquiry on ground that it was not reasonably practicable. The reasons to proceed on the basis that it was not reasonably practicable to hold an inquiry are carried in the impugned order of dismissal dated 11.04.2012. Allusion to these reasons shall be made during the course of this judgment.

4. The petitioner carried an appeal from the order of dismissal to the Deputy Inspector General of Police, CISF, Allahabad, the Appellate Authority, which was dismissed by an order dated 14th August, 2012. The petitioner then preferred a revision under Rule 54 of the Rules. The petitioner’s revision was not decided by the Inspector General for a long period of time. The petitioner, therefore, petitioned this Court by means of Writ (A) No. 794 of 2014, making a grievance of the delay in the decision of his revision. This Court by an order dated 8th January, 2014 disposed of the writ petition with a direction to the Inspector General to consider the same and decide expeditiously within a period of four months from the date of production of a certified copy of the order made in the writ petition aforesaid. In consequence, the Inspector General, the Revisional Authority by his order dated 3rd January, 2014 rejected the revision as barred by time.

5. Aggrieved, this writ petition has been preferred.

6. Heard Mr. Rajesh Kumar Singh, Advocate along with Mr. Mohammad Firoz Khan, learned Counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Piyush Mishra, learned Central Government Counsel appearing on behalf of respondents.

7. It is pointed out by the learned Counsel for the petitioner that the order of dismissal from service was passed dispensing with inquiry under Rule 33 of the