( 1. ) THIS L. P. A. is taken up for final disposal with the consent of parties. ( 2. ) THE ticklish question before the Court is what can one do with a Constable in the Special Armed Force if he performs his second marriage which is in violation of Rule 22 of M. P. Civil Services (Conduct) Rules, 1965 with the consent of the first wife but without obtaining permission of the Government as required under the rules.

( 3. ) THE answer to this question has to be looked at both from our human angle and also in accordance with the law prevailing at the relevant time.

( 4. ) THE admitted facts leading to the termination of the Constable are as follows :-The appellant who was a Police Constable was married to one Reena Rai in the year 1986. After leading a happy married life, in 1994, disputes started cropping up between the husband and the wife. Ultimately, a Panchayat was held and at the end of Panchayat it was resolved that the marriage stood dissolved. An agreement by both the parties was signed and both the parties were declared free to marry again by the Panchayat.

( 5. ) PURSUANT to the Panchayat, the wife Reena Rai gave a declaration on Affidavit, dated 11-2-1994 before the Oath Commissioner, Katni affirming that she is dissolving the marriage and that she has no relationship with the appellant and the appellant was free to marry again.

( 6. ) ACCORDING to the appellant, the marriage stood dissolved in terms of the community usage.

( 7. ) THE appellant pursuant to the declaration made by the first wife on 11-2-1994 got married to one Usha Gupta. The appellant was, however, providing maintenance to his first wife Reena Rai as per an arrangement.

( 8. ) THE appellant committed default in paying the maintenance amount. Being naturally aggrieved by not receiving the maintenance, the first wife Reena Rai (hereinafter referred to as the first wife for the sake of understanding the parties) gave a complaint to the police complaining that her maintenance was not being paid regularly. The object of the complaint by the first wife was to make sure that out of the salary of the appellant maintenance be paid to the first wife without fail.

( 9. ) HOWEVER, the Commandant of 8th Battalion, Chhindwara on the basis of the complaint given by the first wife issued departmental charge-sheet against the appellant on the charge of marrying again while the first wife is still alive and as being contrary to the rules. After completion of the inquiry, the Disciplinary Authority, namely the Superintendent of Police, Chhindwara, by his order dated 13-4-1998 terminated the services of the appellant. The appeal preferred by the appellant was also dismissed. The appellant preferred a revision to the Director General of Police, Bhopal. The Director General of Police, Bhopal quashed the termination by an order dated 13-4-1998 and remanded the matter for a proper departmental inquiry.

( 10. ) AFTER the Revisional Authority quashed the order of termination, unfortunately the appellant was not reinstated as he should have been. The Commandant without reinstating the appellant into service called the appellant on 25-5-2000 and gave a Memo No. 350 E/2000, dated 25-5-2000 together with the copy of the Inquiry Report and directed him to submit his reply within a fortnight. Without reinstating the appellant, the Commandant, 8th Battalion, Chhindwara once again passed the order of termination dated 29-6-2000 terminating the appellant from service.

( 11. ) THE appellant being aggrieved preferred an appeal. The appeal was rejected by an order dated 29-3-2000. Thereafter, the appellant once again preferred a revision. It was contended before the revisional authority that the revisional authority had quashed the order of termination on 13-4-1998 and he was once again terminated from service on 29-6-2000. At least from 13-4-1998 to 29-6-2000, the appellant should have been paid wages. However, the Revisional Authority without referring this aspects of the matter rejected