ORDER :

The present Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, seeking the following relief:

“..to issue a Writ, Order or Direction, more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the Respondents No.1 & 2 in issuing proceedings dated 16-11-2021 vide Ref No.Estt./805/2021-22 by appointing the 3rd Respondent as Enquiry Officer and directing to complete the Disciplinary Enquiry against the Petitioner on the same set of charges which are subject matter in Crime No.34 of 2020 on the file of Koduru Police Station, Krishna District for the offences punishable under Section 409, 417, 419 & 420 r/w Section 34 of IPC as illegal, arbitrary, violation of Principles of Natural Justice, violation of Articles 14, 19(1)(g) and 21 of the Constitution of India and set-aside the same and consequentially direct the Respondents to stall the disciplinary proceedings against the Petitioner in pursuance to the Charge-Memo dated 30.01.2020 till finaliszation of the criminal proceedings and to pass such other order or orders..”

2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner, learned standing counsel for the respondents.

3. The brief facts of the petitioner in nutshell that he is working as Assistant Manager in the 2nd Respondent Branch of 1st respondent Bank and discharging his duties to the utmost satisfaction of the authorities concerned, wherein a false criminal case was registered against him with false allegations that he misappropriated the bank funds to an extent of Rs.1,42,77,133.91/-. Based on the allegations a Crime No.34 of 2020 was registered on the file of Koduru Police Station, Krishna District, U/s. 409, 417, 419 and 420, r/w. Section 34 I.P.C. In this case the petitioner was arrested by the Station House Officer, Koduru Police Station on 26.02.2020 and he was remanded before the Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Avanigadda. The Trial Court dismissed the petitioner Bail Petition and hence he approached this Court and filed Crl.P. No.1862 of 2020 seeking Regular Bail. Then this Court was pleased to consider the material on record and was pleased to allow the Bail Petition on 11.05.2020. The further case of the petitioner that the investigation by the Police Investigation agency is pending and charge-sheet was not filed but suddenly the 1st and 2nd respondents were issued proceedings dated 16.11.2021 vide Ref.No.Estt./805/2021-22, wherein it is stated that the 3rd respondent who was an Advocate was appointed as Enquiry Officer to deal with the departmental enquiry pending criminal proceedings against him. The petitioner further submitted that he was falsely implicated in the present disciplinary case and on the same set of charges/allegations he was also falsely implicated in a criminal case.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that pursuant to the charge memo dated 30.01.2020 the petitioner submitted his detailed explanation on 15.02.2020. After considering the detailed explanation in which the enquiry officer specifically directed to complete the enquiry and submitted the report within 15 days and the respondent authorities are proceeded further and appointed domestic enquiry officer vide proceeding dated 16.11.2021 and opined that the explanation is not satisfactory. Hence challenging the same the present writ petition is filed.

5. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the charges under departmental domestic enquiry and criminal charges in criminal proceedings are one and the same the witnesses in domestic enquiry as well as criminal proceedings are one and the same (All witnesses are staff members of the Bank). Therefore, both the proceedings cannot be proceeded simultaneously when charges as well as witnesses are one and the same. He further submits that the Sub Clause 8 of Rule 66 of the Staff regulations / conduct rules specifically provides that the management may await the decision of the trial Court and stay the enquiries into the misconduct of the emp