JUDGMENT Ashok Bhushan, J.—Heard Sri Rajeev Sharma, counsel for the petitioner and Sri S. K. Rai appearing for the respondent Nos. 1, 2 and 3. 2. By this writ petition, the petitioner has prayed for quashing of the order dated 16.10.2001 Annexure-8 to the writ petition passed by the Deputy Inspector General of Police, Central Reserve Police Force, Allahabad, U. P. 3. By the impugned order dated 16.10.2001, an order of dismissal from service has been passed under Section 11 (1) of the Central Reserve Police Force Act, 1949 read with Rule 27 of the Central Reserve Police Force Rules, 1955. The petitioner was appointed in the Central Reserve Police Force as Assistant Sub-Inspector (M). The disciplinary proceedings were initiated against the petitioner under Rule 27 of Central Reserve Police Force Rules, 1955, by memorandum dated 22.4.2000 Annexure-4 to the writ petition and consequent to the said disciplinary proceedings, the dismissal order has been passed. The counsel for the respondents has submitted that against the order of dismissal impugned in the writ petition, the petitioner has right of appeal under Rule 28 of Central Reserve Police Force Rules, 1955, hence the writ petition be dismissed on the ground of availability of statutory alternative remedy. The counsel for the petitioner in reply to the aforesaid submission has submitted that although the petitioner has preferred an appeal against the dismissal order to the Inspector General of Police but actually no appeal is maintainable. The counsel for the petitioner has referred to Annexure-7 to the writ petition which is a copy of the appeal dated 26.11.2001 filed by the petitioner against the dismissal order to the Inspector General of Police. In view of the above submission of counsel for both the parties, the first question for consideration in the writ petition is as to whether the order of dismissal passed against the petitioner is appealable. 4. The counsel for the petitioner elaborating his submission has submitted that Rule 28 refers to Rule 27 which is with regard to the procedure for awarding of punishment. The counsel for the petitioner has submitted that in table given in Rule 27, the petitioner is not covered by any of the items, hence no punishment can be awarded to him under Rule 27. Consequently, Rule 28 is not applicable. The counsel for the petitioner has submitted that in table given in Rule 27, the petitioner is not covered by any of the items, hence no punishment can be awarded to him under Rule 27. Consequently, Rule 28 is not applicable. The counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the table given in Rule 27 refers to Subedar (Inspector), Sub-Inspector, others except constables and enrolled followers. The counsel for the petitioner has submitted that since the petitioner is Assistant Sub-Inspector (M), he is not covered by Rule 27 ; hence the appeal is not maintainable. 5. From the submissions of counsel for the parties, as noted above, the first question which arises for determination is as to whether petitioner has right of appeal under Rule 28 of Central Reserve Police Force Rules, 1955 (hereinafter referred to as the Rules, 1955). For considering the aforesaid submission, a look over the provisions of Central Reserve Police Force Act, 1949 (hereinafter referred to as the Act, 1949) and Rules, 1955, is required to be made. Before proceeding further, it is relevant to note that it is the case of the petitioner that he is member of C.R.P.F. (Central Reserve Police Force). The counsel for the respondents has also submitted that petitioner is a member of Central Reserve Police Force who has also allotted No. 951860138. He has submitted that only those persons are allotted numbers who are member of the force. Petitioner being member of the force, the provisions of the Act, 1949 and the Rules, 1955 are fully applicable on the petitioner. 6. Section 11 of the Act, 1949, refers to minor punishment. Section 11 (1) of the Act, 1949, is quoted as below : “11. Petitioner being member of the force, the provisions of the Act, 1949 and the Rules, 1955 are fully applicable on the petitioner. 6. Section 11 of the Act, 1949, refers to minor punishment. Section 11 (1) of the Act, 1949, is quoted as below : “11. Minor punishment.—(1) The Commandant or any other authority or officer as may be prescribed may, subject to any rules made under this Act, award in lieu of, or in addition to, suspension or dismissal any one or more of the following punishments to any member of the Force whom he considers to be guilty of disobedience, neglect of duty, or remission in the discharge of any duty or of other misconduct in his capacity as a member of the Force, that is to say : (a) reduction in rank ; (b) fine of any amount not exceeding one month’s pay and allowances ; (c) confinement to quarters, lines or camp for a term not exceeding one month ; (d) confinement in the quarter-guard for not more than (twenty-eight) days, with or without punishment drill or extra guard, fatigue or other duty ; and (e) removal from any office of distinction or special emolument in the Force.” The Rules, 1955, contains a definition and Rule 2 (h) defines subordinate officer which is quoted as below : “2 (h). “subordinate officer” means a member of the Force of the rank of Subedar Major, Subedar, Sub-Inspector.” Section 4A provides for composition of the Force which is quoted as below : “4A. Composition of the Force.—(1) Central Reserve Police Force shall be constituted as follows : (a) Central Reserve Police Force (Regular) ; (b) Central Reserve Police Force (Auxiliary) ; (2) Officers, Subordinate Officers and other persons appointed to or enrolled into the Central Reserve Police Force (Regular) shall be liable for the service for the term mentioned in their enrolment letter of appointment or in the rules made in this behalf. (3) Officers, Subordinate Officers and other persons appointed to or enrolled into the Central Reserve Police Force (Auxiliary) shall serve as and when they are called out for service by the Director General with the consent of the Central Government or for training under the order of the Director General.” Section 5 also provides for composition of the force. Section 5 provides that a battalion other than signals battalion be comprised of. Section 5 provides that a battalion other than signals battalion be comprised of. Section 5 (2) empowers the Central Government subject to provisions of Section 4 to make such changes in the composition of the force as it thinks fit. Rule 6 provides that all the officers and men mentioned in Rule 5 shall be deemed to be the members of the force. The Chapter VI of the Rules, 1955, deals with the discipline. Rules 27 and 28 are the rules which have been referred by counsel for both the parties and which are required to be interpreted in this case. 7. Rule 27 deals with procedure for the award of punishment. Rule 27 is quoted as below : “27. Procedure for the award of punishments.—[(a) The punishment shown as items 1 to 11 in the column 2 of the table] below may be inflicted on non-gazetted officers and men of the various ranks shown in each of the headings of columns 3 to 6, by the authorities named below such heading under the conditions mentioned in column 7 : Table Sl. No. Punishment Subedar (Inspector) Sub-Inspector Other except Const. & enrolled followers Consts. & enrolled followers Remarks 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 1. Dismissal or removal from the Force D.I.G.P. D.I.G.P. Comdt. Comdt.) 2. Reduction to a lower time-scale of pay D.I.G.P. D.I.G.P. Comdt. Comdt.) 3. Reduction to a lower stage in the time scale of pay for a specified period D.I.G.P. D.I.G.P. Comdt. Comdt.) To be inflicted after formal depart-mental enquiry 4. Compulsory retirement D.I.G.P. D.I.G.P. Comdt. Comdt.) 5. Fine of any amount not exceeding one month’s pay and allowances. D.I.G.P. D.I.G.P. Comdt. Comdt.) 6. Confinement in the Quarter Guard exceeding seven days but not more than twenty eight days with or without punish-ment drill or extra guard fatigue or other duty — — — Comdt.) 7. Stoppage of increment D.I.G.P. D.I.G.P. Comdt. Comdt. 8. Removal from any office of distinction or special emolu-ment in the force D.I.G.P. D.I.G.P. Comdt. Comdt. May be inflicted without a formal depart-mental enquiry. 9. Censure Comdt. Comdt. Asstt. Comdt. or Coy Comdr. Asstt. Comdt. or Coy Comdr. 10. Confinement to not more than seven days with or without punishment or extra guard fatigue or other duty. — — — Comdt. 11. Confinement to quarters lines, camp, punish-ment drill, fatigue duties etc. for a term not exceeding one month. 9. Censure Comdt. Comdt. Asstt. Comdt. or Coy Comdr. Asstt. Comdt. or Coy Comdr. 10. Confinement to not more than seven days with or without punishment or extra guard fatigue or other duty. — — — Comdt. 11. Confinement to quarters lines, camp, punish-ment drill, fatigue duties etc. for a term not exceeding one month. — — — Comdt. ...............................................................................................................................................................................................................................................” 8. Rule 28 deals with the appeal. Rule 28 (a) is quoted as below : “28. Appeal.—(a) Every subordinate officer or every officer of any other rank below him including an enrolled follower against whom an order (under serial numbers 1 to 7 of the table in Rule 27) or under Clauses (d) and (e) of Section 13 is passed is entitled to prefer one appeal against such order to the Inspector General ; if the original order was passed by Deputy Inspector General and to the Deputy Inspector General ; if the original order was passed by the Commandant.” 9. The submission of the counsel for the petitioner is that Rule 28 refers to right of appeal against an order under Serial No. 1 to 7 of the table under Rule 27. He has submitted that under Rule 27, Sub-Inspector (M) is not mentioned, hence no punishment can be awarded on Sub-Inspector (M) under Rule 27 and there is no question of right of appeal under Rule 28 to the petitioner. The contention is that in Column 4 only “Sub-Inspector” has been mentioned which does not mention Sub-Inspector (M), hence Sub-Inspectors (M) are beyond the purview of Rule 27 and no punishment can be awarded on Sub-Inspector (M) under Rule 27. Rule 23 which deals with organisation of a battalion refers to Sub-Inspector, Sub-Inspector for Civil Investigation and Police Liaison [Rule 23 (c)]. Further Rule 23 (c) (4) refers to Sub-Inspectors includes M. M. Rules 78 and 79 also refer to Sub-Inspector Adjutant and Quarter Master Sub-Inspector. Rules 78 and 79 are quoted below : “78. Sub-Inspector Adjutant.—(a) The appointment of Sub-Inspector (M) Adjutant shall be made by the Commandant by selection from Sub-Inspectors who are good instructors and disciplinarians. (b) The maximum period of the appointment shall not ordinarily exceed three years.” “79. Quarter Master Sub-Inspector.—(a) The appointment of Quarter Master Sub-Inspector shall be made by the Commandant from amongst Sub-Inspectors with special qualification in the direction. (b) The maximum period of the appointment shall not ordinarily exceed three years.” “79. Quarter Master Sub-Inspector.—(a) The appointment of Quarter Master Sub-Inspector shall be made by the Commandant from amongst Sub-Inspectors with special qualification in the direction. (b) The maximum period of the appointment shall not ordinarily exceed three years.” 10. From the aforesaid provisions of Rules, 1955, it is clear that apart from Sub-Inspectors, several other Sub-Inspectors have been referred to. Section 11 of the Act, 1949, provides for awarding of punishments to any member of the force. Rule 27 is the only rule which deals with procedure for award of punishment. Rule 27 being the only rule for awarding punishment, it is clear that different kind of Sub-Inspectors which have been referred to in different rules have to be treated to be included in cadre of Sub-Inspector referred to in Rule 27. Although Column 4 of Rule 27 only uses the word “Sub-Inspector” but use of word Sub-Inspector is descriptive and will include all kind of Sub-Inspectors. Although Sub-Inspector (M) has not been referred to in the Rules, 1955, but under Rule 5 sub-rule (2), the Central Government is empowered to make such changes in composition of force as it thinks fit. The counsel for the respondents stated that Sub-Inspector (M) has also been included in the Central Reserve Police Force under the orders of the Central Government. 11. In view of the above, it is amply clear that use of word Sub-Inspector in Rule 27 will include all kind of Sub-Inspectors including Sub-Inspector (M) and the contention of the counsel for the petitioner that Sub-Inspector (M) is not covered by Rule 27 is not correct. 12. The opening words of Rule 28, states “Every subordinate officer or every officer of any other rank below him including an enrolled follower”. The words “every officer of any other rank” against whom an order under Serial Nos. 1 to 7 of the table in Rule 27 is passed, is entitled to prefer an appeal. The opening words of Rule 28 are wide enough to include officer of any other rank Assistant Sub-Inspector (M). The words “every officer of any other rank” against whom an order under Serial Nos. 1 to 7 of the table in Rule 27 is passed, is entitled to prefer an appeal. The opening words of Rule 28 are wide enough to include officer of any other rank Assistant Sub-Inspector (M). It is not denied that the petitioner is a member of Central Reserve Police Force when the petitioner is member of the Force, it cannot be held that the right of appeal is denied to him although it has been provided to all other subordinate officers or every officer of other ranks including the enrolled followers. Further, Rule 27 also contemplates that punishment shown on items No. 1 to 11 in Column No. 2 may be inflicted on non-gazetted officers and men of various ranks. The words “non-gazetted officers and men of the ranks” used in Section 27 are wide enough to include its Assistant Sub-Inspector (M). Sub-Inspector referred to in the Heading of Column No. 4 can very well include Sub-Inspector (M). From the Act and the Rules, it does not appear that any separate procedure has been provided for Assistant Sub-Inspector (M). If the submission of counsel for the petitioner is accepted, then neither any punishment can be awarded to Assistant Sub-Inspector (M) under Rule 27 since according to his submission, he is not included under Rule 27 nor disciplinary proceedings can be drawn against him. 13. From Annexure-4 to the writ petition, i.e., memorandum dated 22.4.2000 by which disciplinary proceedings were initiated against the petitioner in reference to Rule 27 of Central Reserve Police Force Rules, 1955. From Annexure-4 to the writ petition, it is clear that the respondents have initiated disciplinary proceedings under Rule 27 of the said Rules and the punishment order has been passed against the petitioner under Rule 27. The order of dismissal also clearly refers to Rule 27 of Central Reserve Police Force Rules, 1955. When the punishment order is shown to be passed against the petitioner under Rule 27 of the Central Reserve Police Force Rules, 1955, it cannot be said that the right of appeal under Rule 28 is not available to him. The order of dismissal also clearly refers to Rule 27 of Central Reserve Police Force Rules, 1955. When the punishment order is shown to be passed against the petitioner under Rule 27 of the Central Reserve Police Force Rules, 1955, it cannot be said that the right of appeal under Rule 28 is not available to him. The words of Rule 28 are “every subordinate officer or every officer of any other rank below him including an enrolled follower” are wide enough, as observed above, and when punishment under Rule 27 is awarded against the petitioner, he has right of appeal under Rule 28 of the Central Reserve Police Force Rules, 1955. 14. In view of above, submission of counsel for the respondents that the petitioner has right of appeal under Rule 28 is well founded. From Annexure-7 to the writ petition, it is clear that an appeal has already been filed by the petitioner on 26.11.2001, against the dismissal order. The petitioner having already filed an appeal there being remedy of appeal available to the petitioner, it is appropriate that the appeal of the petitioner filed against the dismissal order be considered and decided. There is no good ground to entertain the writ petition when the remedy of appeal is available to the petitioner which has already been filed. 15. In view of the above, this writ petition is disposed of directing the respondent No. 2 to consider and decide the appeal of the petitioner Annexure-7 to the writ petition expeditiously preferably within a period of three months from the date of production of a certified copy of this order before him.