JUDGMENT :

1. Heard the petitioner-in-person. Also heard Mr. S.S. Roy, learned CGC appearing for the respondent No. 1 and Mr. K.N. Choudhury, learned senior counsel, assisted by Mr. D.J. Das, learned counsel for the respondent Nos. 2 to 5.

2. By filing this writ petition under article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner has prayed, inter alia, (i) to set aside and quash the letter No. NEDFi/HRD/55(STAFF)/No. 3988/2018-19, dated August 10, 2018 with all consequential benefits; (ii) to direct the respondents to reinstate the petitioner in the post of Deputy General Manager with all consequential benefits of arrear salary, seniority, promotion, etc., with all consequential benefits.

3. Bereft of details and to maintain brevity, for the purpose of this judgment, it would be sufficient to mention that in this writ petition, the case projected by the petitioner is that he was initially appointed as Deputy Manager (Grade-B post) in the establishment of respondent No. 2 on April 8, 1996. He was promoted to Grade-C on October 1, 2000 and on February 1, 2009, he was promoted to Grade-D and posted as Deputy General Manager. Thereafter, w.e.f. July 27, 2011, he was entrusted with additional charge of Chief Vigilance Officer (‘CVO’).

4. It is projected that while working as CVO, the petitioner found out various illegalities. It has been mentioned that he found out submission of forged travelling bill by one senior staff, high value loan sanctioned to one industry was disbursed at one go in violation of banking norms and that the said loan had become non-performing asset (‘NPA’), manipulation of minutes of Departmental Promotion Committee (‘DPC’) to give undue benefit to one officer. For reasons assigned in the la*st part of this judgment and order, the court is inclined to withhold the names of persons against whom allegations has been made by the petitioner. It is projected that when the petitioner voiced his concern, the senior officers connived together and became vindictive against the petitioner by locking his chamber, caused delay in releasing reimbursement due to him, his leave applications were kept pending and, thus, made life miserable for him and that by order dated December 20, 2017, he was transferred from Guwahati to Kohima. The petitioner projects that he had submitted his representations before the Central Vigilance Commission (‘CVC’) and to the Ministry of DoNER, but as no action was taken he became demoralized and by submitting representations dated August 2, 2018 and August 7, 2018, the petitioner had prayed for his release from service.

5. In the meanwhile the petitioner had approached this court by filing WP(C) No. 182/2018, challenging his transfer while his representation against his transfer order was pending and this court by order dated January 17, 2018, directed the petitioner to submit his representation before the Board of directors of respondent No. 2 and in the interim, the respondents were directed not to take coercive steps against the petitioner till disposal of his representation. The petitioner submitted his representation before the Board of directors of respondent No. 2 on January 19, 2018 and the said representation was made over to DGM (Vigilance), State Bank of India for examination as per decision of the Board taken in its meeting. The petitioner submitted another representation dated June 15, 2018 before the Board of directors of respondent No. 2, seeking copy of report by SBI DGM (Vigilance) report on his representation and also requesting the CVO of respondent No. 2 to examine the said report and give her opinion and recommendation to CVC through CVO, Ministry of DoNER. The petitioner also submitted a representation dated June 20, 2018 before the Manager (HRD) of respondent No. 2 for providing protection as per CVC Circular No. March 16, 2016, dated March 28, 2016. The petitioner also submitted two other representations dated June 29, 2018 and August 2, 2018 to release him from service b