(1) LEAVE granted.

(2) HEARD on merits.

(3) SHRI G. Ramaswamy, learned counsel for the respondent does not support the tribunals order for the reasons given therein in view of the decisions of this Court in Union of India v. A.N. Saxena and Union of India v. K.K. Dhawan. However, Shri Ramaswamy contended that the respondent has raised several other grounds before the tribunal for quashing the charge-sheet issued to the respondent, which have not been considered by the tribunal in view of the fact that the tribunal quashed the charge-sheet on the only ground given therein. On this basis, Shri Ramaswamy submitted that it would be appropriate to remit the matter to the tribunal for a fresh decision on the other points urged on behalf of the respondent (applicant before the tribunal). Shri Ramaswamy strenuously urged that the basis on which the charge-sheet has been issued to the respondent is not available for initiating the disciplinary proceedings inasmuch as the matter on the basis of those facts had earlier been closed by the Department after full examination. He submits that for this reason initiation of disciplinary enquiry on that basis is no longer permis