Against this order of discharge the appellant filed a writ petition in the Delhi High Court which was dismissed by the Delhi High Court and the appellant has preferred this appeal with leave granted by this Court.
We have heard the learned Counsel for the parties.
After the dismissal of the writ petition by the Delhi High Court the criminal case against the appellant was finally disposed of and the appellant was acquitted of the charge of theft on 8 11 1976.
Unfortunately for the appellant, the appellant got involved in a criminal case in relation to theft of certain Mig Batteries.
As the appellant happened to be an accused in the criminal case the authorities companycerned on the basis that the appellant was an accused in a criminal case and was likely to be companyvicted of the charge of theft, discharged the appellant companysidering the appellant to be unsuitable by order dated 6 4 1973.
Before any order had been passed on the said application of the appellant for extension of his term the appellant companytinued in service for a further period of one year in view of the provisions of D.I. Rules.
The authorities companycerned after holding an enquiry decided to hand over the case to the Municipal Court instead of trying the appellant by Court Martial.
On the expiry of the period of service of 9 years the appellant in terms of the relevant provisions of the regulation made an application for the term of his service being extended by another 6 years.
Amarendra Nath Sen, J. The appellant was employed in the Air Force as an airman.
The appellant was, however, actually discharged on 19 11 1973.
