under the statute cannot be introduced by way of a rule, particularly in absence of specific delegation of power in this regard. Dismissal and compulsory retirement are two different kinds of punishment and cannot be treated as interchangeable. Thus, in absence of any delegation of power to frame rules introducing a new punishment, Rule 27, to the extent it introduces the punishment of compulsory retirement, is ultra vires the CRPF Act; Civil Appeal @ SLP (C) No.4106/2021 Page 13 of 38(iv) The charge levelled on the original petitioner was not established, as no eye- witness was presented to prove it. Otherwise also, Hawaldar M. Devnath, who was allegedly assaulted by the original petitioner, was inimical to the original petitioner and made a false complaint. The Disciplinary Authority and the Appellate Authority acted in a mechanical manner. 12. In support of his submissions, Mr. Anand Shankar relied on a decision of this Court in General Officer Commanding-in-Chief & Anr. v. Subash