WP(C) 4943/2007 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR JUSTICE HRISHIKESH ROY The petitioner who served as a Constable under the 73 Bn. of CRPF had earlier ch allenged his discharge order in pursuant to a disciplinary proceeding drawn up a gainst him. The petitioner is aggrieved by partial implementation of this Court’s order date d 16.2.04 in Civil Rule No. 3491/1998, whereby Court held that no case of remova l from service is made out and the punishment is shockingly disproportionate to the nature of the allegation. Accordingly, the matter was remitted to the employ er to reconsider a lesser punishment other than removal/ dismissal/compulsory re tirement. Thereafter the petitioner was conditionally reinstated in service on 2 6.7.05 on orders of the Commandant and in the meantime, Writ Appeal No. 225/2004 was filed by the CRPF authority against the learned Single Judge’s order of 16. 2.2004/ The Division Bench on 15.11.2006 dismissed the Writ Appeal in WA No. 225/2004 an d also dismissed the Review Petition No. 47/2009 on 29.10.2009 filed by the Unio n of India against the Division Bench order of 15.11.06. It is submitted by Mr. TJ Mahanta, learned counsel for the petitioner that notwi thstanding the dismissal of both the Writ Appeals and the Review Petition, the C RPF authorities have not given the full benefit of the Court’s order dated 16.2. 2004 in Civil Rule No. 3491/1998. Mr. N. Bora, learned CGC submits that the matter has been delayed in view of the proceedings pending before the Division Bench and now that the order of the Sin gle Judge stands affirmed, the CRPF authorities would give effect to the learned Single Judge’s order in letter and spirit. Having regard to the above submission, this case stands allowed the respondents are directed to ensure that the Court’s direction dated 16.2.2004 in Civil Rule No. 3491/1998 are fully complied by them. Necessary exercise in this regard be completed within 3 months from today. The case is allowed accordingly.