392 by the Constitution Removal of Difficulties Order No.
Appeal by special leave from the judgment and order dated July 30, 1958, of the Punjab High Court in Civil Writ Application No.
C. Chatterjee, I. M. Lal and B. P. Maheshwari, for the appellant.
392 It was number within the companypetence of the provisional Parliament to enact the Act in 1951, as there was numbercompliance with the companydition precedent to such an Act being passed under Art.
M. Sikri, Advocate General for the State, of Punjab, Mohinder Singh Pannum, Additional Advocate General for the State of Punjab and D. Gupta, for respondent No.
426 of 1958.
He held charge as Superintendent of Police in various districts but was reverted as Assistant Superintendent of Police in August 1957, and was eventually Posted to Dharamsala in March 1958.
Thereupon he came to this Court and was granted special leave.
312 as the amendment made by the President by the Constitution Removal of Difficulties Order No.
after called the Rules , framed under s. 3 of the Act.
Shri Chatterjee appearing for the appellant has raised the following six points in support of the appeal 1 , The amendment made by the President in Art.
December 11.
226 of the Constitution before the Punjab High Court challenging the companystitutionality of the Act and the legality of the enquiry against him.
CIVIL APPELLATE, JURISDICTiON Civil Appeal No.
II of 26th January, 1950, was in excess of the power companyferred on him under Art.
732 of 1958.
Sen and T. M. Sen, for the Intervener.
He thereupon immediately made an application under Art.
1949, and posted to the State of Punjab.
Notice was issued to him by the Enquiry Officer in July 1958.
The appellant was appointed to the Indian Police Service on October 1.,
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by WANCHOO, J. This appeal by special leave raises the question of the companystitutionality of the All India Services Act, LXI of 1951 hereinafter called the Act .
He was thereafter placed under suspension under r. 7 of the Rules pending disciplinary proceedings against him, and Shri K. L. Bhudiraja S. was appointed enquiry officer to hold the departmental enquiry against him.
312 of the Constitution by virtue of his power under Art.
312 The Rules when promulgated in 1955 were bad as they were repugnant to Art.
In the same month he was informed that it was proposed to take action against him under r. 5 of the All India Services Discipline and Appeal Rules, 1955, herein.
