ORDER 1. Rule nisi issued. Heard both the sides. 2. The appellant has been removed from service for the alleged misconduct without holding a departmental inquiry on the ground that it is not reasonably practicable to hold the inquiry. The reasoning contained in para 6 of the impugned order, at Annexure A, is as under: If the normal procedure of removal from service is followed, it is likely that the evidence may be destroyed and members of Mahila Samiti being lady folk may not come up to adduce evidence for fear of threat and harassment. Further, it has also been proved beyond doubt that Sh. Meshram has will fully lost the Bill Register which is the vital document to bring out the actual amount of misappropriation. I am, therefore, satisfied in this particular case, it is not reasonably practicable to hold an inquiry in which he can be informed of charges against him and given a reasonable opportunity of being heard in respect of these charges. 3. The grounds mentioned in paragraph 6 of the order are altogether irrelevant and ex facie inadequate for dispensing with the enquiry. We are satisfied that this is not a matter where a departmental enquiry on the charges leveled against the petitioner is not reasonably practicable. We, therefore, allow the writ petition and set aside the impugned order of removal from service. The petitioner will be deemed to have continued in service and will be entitled to payment of salary and allowances due to him in accordance with rules. It will be open to the competent authority to institute a proper enquiry and to proceed against the petitioner in accordance with the relevant rules by following the normal procedure for departmental enquiry. Rule is made absolute to this extent. 4. The writ petition is disposed of accordingly with costs. For Citation : 1987 Supp SCC 164.