1. Petitioner has called in question Order No. 961 of 2000 dated 28.10.2000 issued by respondent No.4 whereby and whereunder he came to be removed from service on the grounds taken in the writ petition. 2. It appears that petitioner remained absent w.e.f. 21.01.2000 and was asked to report for duty, but, when he failed to do so, a show cause notice dated 27.06.2000 was issued against him informing him to resume his duties within three days. Despite that he did not join his duties. Accordingly, he came to be removed from service w.e.f. 21.01.2000 vide impugned order dated 28.10.2000. 3. Learned counsel for the respondents was asked to produce the record in order to see as to whether any departmental enquiry as required under Section 359 of J&K Police Rules was ever conducted, but, he failed to produce the same, though, the respondents have filed the reply. 4. I have gone through the order impugned which on the face of it appears to be bad in law. While going through the order impugned, one comes to an inescapable conclusion that it came to be passed without hearing the petitioner and without following due procedure. If at all the respondents had to impose any punishment, as contained in the provisions applicable on the subject read with J&K Police Rules, they have to follow the provisions of Rule 359 of J&K Police Rules, which has not been done in the present case. 5. In the given circumstances, this petition is allowed and Order No. 961 of 2000 dated 28.10.2000 is quashed with liberty to the respondents to conduct fresh inquiry in the matter, if they so choose, within three months from today. It is further provided that if inquiry is not conducted within the aforesaid period, in that eventuality, it is held that the petitioner is not entitled to salary for the period he remained absent but the said period shall qualify for all other service benefits. 6. Disposed of along with connected CMA(s).