Michael Buttigieg was about to be sworn in as a police inspector when he was told he could no longer form part of the force without being informed exactly why.

"I was humiliated in front of about 200 people during the ceremony. Later, when I went home, I found a letter informing me I was no longer part of the force I had joined nine years before... They had known about it during the ceremony and just wanted to humiliate me," Mr Buttigieg, a former police sergeant, said.

Earlier this week, a court found Mr Buttigieg and another two police officers' dismissal from the force, in 2001, was null and void because they were not informed about ongoing procedures against them by the Public Service Commission.

The court found the men were not given the opportunity to defend themselves. Mr Buttigieg and former inspectors David Gatt and Ivan Portelli are now considering suing for damages and are calling for the resignation of Police Commissioner John Rizzo, who preferred not to comment when contacted.

The three men had taken former Prime Minister Eddie Fenech Adami and former Police Commissioner George Grech to court after they were dismissed in 2001. (Mr Grech resigned in 2001 following a sex scandal.)

On Monday, the Court of Appeal confirmed a previous judgment finding that the manner in which the men were dismissed from the police force was incorrect. The court ordered their reinstatement and that they be placed in the same position they had been in when dismissed.

However, the three former policemen are not sure they will return. While they say they still love police work, they do not want to return to the force headed by Mr Rizzo who testified against them before the PSC.

"I like the work... But there is no precedent and we don't know how to go about it," Dr Gatt said. "The Police Commissioner clearly does not want us there. He'll make our lives miserable. It would be like going back before my executioner... Besides, police officers have no rights and do not have the back up of a trade union," he added.

Since their removal from the force, all three struggled to find employment. Dr Gatt decided to study law and became a lawyer while the other two bounced around from one job to another.

All three had been asked to resign before being removed but had decided not to because they felt they had done nothing wrong.

Mr Portelli had been accused of being seen on a criminal's yacht. He had explained he had gone there on his off day to meet an informant.

Dr Gatt and Mr Buttigieg were also accused of mingling with criminals.However, they said, the identity of these criminals was never revealed to them. No disciplinary action was taken against them and they were never arraigned over the allegations. Instead, they were removed from the force by the PSC following procedures they did not know about.

Mr Buttigieg had been a police officer for nine years and was informed about his removal on the day he was meant to become an inspector.

Mr Portelli and Dr Gatt were in court at the time.

"I was making legal submissions in a case before a magistrate when I was handed the letter that told me I was no longer a police officer as from that day," Dr Gatt said, adding he had been an officer for 12 years.

"I was going crazy," he recalled, as Mr Portelli added: "It was as though the building was collapsing on me. What I had built throughout my life, my career and reputation, was collapsing."

All three agreed Mr Rizzo should step down following their case.

"He had said, in court, that he would take responsibility for the case. Now he has to live up to his words," they agreed, Mr Buttigieg demanding an apology from Dr Fenech Adami.

A Justice Ministry spokesman noted that the judgment was strictly procedural.

"It is interesting to note that when the Police Commissioner placed all the cards on the table in the court proceedings and exhibited the tapes and transcripts of the (telephone) interceptions... two of the officers (Mr Buttigieg and Dr Gatt) opposed the presentation of those documents," the spokesman said.

"This is, of course, hardly an indication they had nothing to hide and it is all the more strange given that the officers had always maintained they could not understand why they had been removed from the force."

The transcripts were removed from the court records after the court upheld an application on grounds that a warrant was not exhibited. Testifying in court, Mr Rizzo said the phone calls were recorded when the police were investigating a hold-up.