JUDGMENT :

V. Kameswar Rao, J.

CM No. 53459/2022 (by petitioner seeking permission to place on record additional documents)

For the reasons stated in the application, the same is allowed and the additional documents are taken on record.

Application is disposed of.

W.P.(C) 10828/2017

1. The challenge in this petition is to the order dated August 09, 2017 in O.A. 2670/2017 and order dated October 04, 2017 in R.A. 205/2017 in O.A. 2670/2017 passed by the Central Administrative Tribunal (‘Tribunal’ for short), Principal Bench, New Delhi.

2. The grievance of the petitioner in the O.A. was to the order of transfer dated June 12, 2017 and initiation of an inquiry. Insofar as the grievance against transfer is concerned, the Tribunal held that the same had become infructuous as the petitioner had joined the place of posting. Insofar as the second grievance is concerned, the Tribunal after stating that he has not filed any record of the inquiry, rejected the said prayer. In fact, we note that the learned counsel for the petitioner withdrew the original application with liberty to challenge the inquiry proceedings, if any initiated, in accordance with law.

3. The petitioner filed a Review Application seeking review of order dated August 09, 2017. The same was decided by the Tribunal on October 04, 2017.

4. The Tribunal after noting that no disciplinary proceedings have been initiated against the petitioner and as such no ground existed for invoking review jurisdiction, dismissed the same.

5. Mr. I. H. Syed, learned Senior Counsel, appearing for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner is an IPS Officer of the 1992 batch and was working in CRPF as IG, posted in North Eastern Sector (NES) between the period May, 2015 to June, 2016. While he was posted in NES as IG, CRPF, on March 29-30, 2017, a joint-operation was conducted by the Army, Assam Police, Shashtra Suraksha Bal and CRPF in Chirang, Assam. It is his case that certain contrary reports as to the genuineness of the encounter was received from the Commandant. The petitioner after summarising the two contrary views, had on April 17, 2017, sent a report to the DG, CRPF recommending an enquiry/investigation into the incident to be carried out by an independent investigation agency.

6. In this background, the transfer order dated June 12, 2017 was issued transferring the petitioner from the post of IG, NES to IG, CIAT School, Chittoor (AP). The petitioner accordingly on June 14, 2017 relinquished the charge as IG, NES and subsequently joined the place of posting. According to Mr. Syed, simultaneously as per some paper reports, an inquiry was initiated on the role of the petitioner in connection with the “procedural aspects” of the enquiry conducted by him. It was in this background that the petitioner had filed the O.A. 2670/2017 before the Tribunal. According to him, the petitioner had sought voluntary retirement from service (‘VRS’ hereinafter) on August 23, 2018 but the same was not accepted by the respondents. He submitted that the petitioner relinquished the charge of his office on November 30, 2018, at Chittoor, after informing all concerned authorities. He has challenged the rejection of his request for VRS in O.A. 528/2018 in Central Administrative Tribunal, Ahmedabad Bench. Subsequently, he was placed under suspension on December 17, 2018 and was then served with a charge sheet dated January 14, 2019 for misconduct as he had relinquished his office unauthorisedly. The Ahmedabad Bench of Tribunal vide order dated January 21, 2019 granted interim relief to the petitioner and restrained the respondent No.1 from passing final orders in the disciplinary proceedings. The petitioner challenged this interim order before the High Court of Gujarat in Special Civil Application 5929/2019. The respondents have also filed a separate Special Civil Application 8430/2019 challenging the interim order granted to the petitioner. According to Mr. Syed vide order dated August 08, 2019, the Gujarat High