DEEPA SHARMA, J.

1. The petitioners have filed these three writ petitions, challenging the common order dated 02.02.2016 of the Central Administrative Tribunal (hereinafter referred to as ‘Tribunal’) whereby the three original applications bearing OA No. 3971/2015, OA No. 2976/2014 & OA No. 2977/2014 of the respondent were allowed.

2. The factual matrix of the case is that the respondent joined the services of Union of India as Income Tax Officer (ITO) Group ‘A’ in December, 1985 and eventually he was promoted and was working as a Joint Commissioner of Income Tax and during the period from 06.11.1996 to 31.12.1998, he was working as Deputy Director, Delhi Zone, Enforcement Directorate (ED), New Delhi..

3. That on 01.01.1998, ED conducted search of three shops and residential premises of one Sh. S.C. Barjatya and during the search, besides other articles, seized a fax message (debit advice), reflecting a debit of US dollar 1,50,000/- from the account of Royalle foundation, Zurich, Switzerland in favour of one S.K. Kapoor holder of account no. 022-9-608080, Hong Kong & Shanghai Banking Corporation (HSBC) as per the advice of customer i.e. Royalle foundation.

4. A complaint dated 04.01.1998 was filed by Sh. S.C. Barjatya with ED claiming that the alleged fax message was a forged document and was planted during the search, with the intention to falsely frame him in that case. On this complaint of Mr. S.C. Barjatya, CBI, took a prima facie view of criminal conspiracy of forging a document and using it as a genuine document with the intention to create false evidences and registered a case RC No. S18/E0001/1999 dated 29.01.1999 against the respondent and one Mr. Abhishek Verma. The proceedings of that case show that the accused Sh. Abhishek Verma filed an application dated 18.07.2000 in the Court, seeking pardon and becoming approver.

5. The said application was opposed by the respondent and his application was rejected by the Special Judge vide order dated 03.05.2001. CBI, however, did not oppose the application dated 18.07.2000 of Sh. Abhishek Verma. In view of the no objection of CBI, the Special Judge allowed the application of the accused Sh. Abhishek Verma, vide order dated 07.09.2001. The respondent challenged the said order before this Court vide Crl. Misc. (Main) No. 3741/2001. While the said petition was pending before this Court, the charge sheet in the case was filed on 28.06.2002 and the Court took cognizance of the offences on 08.07.2002 and the charges were framed on 17.12.2005. This Court in Crl. Misc. (Main) No. 3741/2001, vide order dated 20.08.2007, quashed the order dated 07.09.2001 of the Special Judge and remitted the matter back to the Special Judge for fresh consideration. CBI challenged this order in Supreme Court in Criminal Appeal No. 1837/2013. The Criminal Appeal was dismissed by the Supreme Court vide order dated 22.11.2013.

6. Another FIR No. S19/E0006/99 dated 07.12.1999 was registered against the respondents for amassing assets disproportionate to his known income, on the basis of a preliminary enquiry dated 17.09.1999. Sanction for prosecution was sought by CBI which was accorded on 26.11.2002. The charge sheet was filed on 05.12.2002 and the cognizance was taken by the Court and summons were issued to the respondent on 10.01.2003. The respondent challenged the validity of the sanction by filing applications dated 01.05.2003 and 12.09.2005 before the Special Judge, who dismissed them vide order dated 28.07.2007. This order was challenged in Revision Petition No. 589/2007 before this Court and by order dated 03.10.2007, the sanction order was quashed and the matter was remanded back to the Special Judge for fresh consideration. CBI challenged this order in Crl. Appeal No.1838/2013 in Supreme Court which was dismissed vide order dated 22.11.2013. On remand of the case for reappreciation of the matter whether the sanction to prosecute the respondent validly given or not, the Special Judge, after ap