Ramakrishnan, J.

1. OP(CAT) No.2314/2012 was filed by the present petitioners against the order of the Central Administrative Tribunal, Ernakulam in OA No.340/2012 while OP(CAT) No.568/2013 was filed by the very same petitioners against the order of the same Tribunal in OA No.684/2012. Since the question which arose in both the cases are the same, the facts of the cases are also more or less similar and the point to be decided in both the cases is also same, both the cases are disposed of by a common judgment.

2. The case of the petitioners in both the cases was as follows : The petitioners were working as Inspectors in the Thiruvananthapuram Branch of the Central Bureau of Investigation and while they were working so, pursuant to the judgment of this Court in WP(C) No.13426/2010, the investigation of the Sampath custodial death case was entrusted with the Central Bureau of Investigation (hereinafter called the CBI) as per Annexure A1 attached to Ext.P1 amended copy of the petition filed before the Central Administrative Tribunal (hereinafter called the CAT) produced in OP(CAT) No.568/13 and the investigation was entrusted with a team of officers including the present petitioners and the first petitioner was designated as the Chief Investigating Officer in that case as per Annexure A2 order attached to Ext.P1 mentioned above. The investigation conducted by the first petitioner as the Chief Investigating Officer along with the second petitioner and others in the above said case was appreciated by the Department and the third respondent had granted cash award to the petitioners evidenced by Annexure A3 document attached to Ext.P1 document mentioned above. Since there was threat to the life of the members of the investigation team, the third respondent sent Annexure A4 letter attached to Ext.P1 mentioned above dated 30.09.2010 requesting the Joint Director, Head of the Zone, CBI, Chennai to provide security to the petitioners. While the investigation was in progress, the involvement of two Indian Police Service Officers, namely, the then Superintendent of Police, Palakkad Sri.Vijay Sakhare and the then Inspector General of Police, Thrissur Range Sri.Mohammed Yasin was revealed along with other persons. Accordingly, the first petitioner sought permission during the last week of November 2010 from Sri.Nandakumar Nair, the then Head of Branch, Office of the CBI, Thiruvananthapuram to array 18 persons as accused including the above said higher police officials. That infuriated the Head of Branch and he started issuing memos to the first petitioner even for trivial matters. Thereafter, Sri.Haridath was appointed in the place of the first petitioner as Chief Investigating Officer from 4.12.2010 onwards. At that time, the brother of the deceased Sampath had filed IA No.16944/2010 in WP(C) No.13426/2010 before this Court seeking a detailed report regarding the investigation and production of the entire case diary and as per Annexure A5 order produced along with Ext.P1 mentioned above, this Court was satisfied with the progress of the investigation done and appreciated the work done by the Investigation team and also directed the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Ernakulam to monitor the investigation and ordered not to dislocate the present team without getting orders from this Court. The petitioners were rendering their able assistance in the investigation to Sri.Haridath under the monitoring of the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Ernakulam and it was proceeding in the right direction without interference from any quarters. The team gathered materials overwhelmingly establishing the involvement of the two IPS Officers named above. It is also mentioned in Ext.P1 petition that this Court, after perusing the first tri-weekly progress report dated 1.1.2011 and connected records, not only reprimanded the then Superintendent of Police, CBI, Kochi, but further interdicted Sri.Ashokkumar, Joint Director, Head of Zone, CBI, Chennai and also Sri.N