Point of Law: Section 8 of Act of 2003 is also reproduced as functions and powers of Central Vigilance Commission.

JUDGMENT :

1. Since all the instant petitions involve a common controversy, though with marginal variation in the contextual facts, therefore, for the purposes of the present analogous adjudication, above-numbered SBCWP No.15731/2021, is being tagged in the present batch of petitions (above-numbered SBCWP No.3832/2020 & 2269/2020). Arguments in all the three petitions were therefore, heard together and the same are being decided by this common judgment.

2. The prayer clauses of the present petitions read as under:

SBCWP No.3832/2020:

“It is, therefore, most respectfully prayed by the petitioner before your Lordships that, this writ petition filed by the petitioner, may kindly be allowed with cost and by an appropriate writ order or direction, in the nature thereof;

(a) The impugned departmental enquiry proceedings, being carried out by the respondent Bank, against petitioner pursuance to the impugned Charge-sheet dated 16.08.2018 (Annexure-5), may kindly be held to be without jurisdiction, in view of bar contained under the Rajasthan Marudhara Gramin Bank (Officers and Employees) Service Regulation-2010 and same may kindly be ordered to be dropped, until the final outcome of criminal case, lodged by the respondent Bank, against petitioner, pending trial before the learned Court of Civil Judge and Judicial Magistrate, Deedwana (Nagaur) in Criminal Case titled State of Rajasthan Vs. Ajay Kumar & Ors.

(b) By an appropriate writ order or direction, the impugned order dated 15.10.2018 (Annex 7), passed by the disciplinary authority of the respondent bank for holding department inquiry against petitioner may kindly be declared without jurisdiction and unsustainable in the eye of law and consequently same may kindly be quashed and set aside.

(c) Any other appropriate order or direction, which this Hon’ble Court considers just and proper in the facts and circumstances of this, may kindly be passed in favour of the petitioner.”

SBCWP No.2269/2020:

“It is, therefore, most respectfully prayed by the petitioner before your Lordships that, this writ petition filed by the petitioner, may kindly be allowed with cost and by an appropriate writ order or direction, in the nature thereof;

(a) The impugned punishment order dated 23.05.2019 (Annexure-1), passed by the respondent Chairman of the Bank, being disciplinary authority and the impugned order dated 22.10.2019 (Annexure-2), passed by the Appellate Authority, of the respondent Bank, whereby imposing too harsh penalty against petitioner, may kindly be declared without jurisdiction and illegal in the eye of law and same may kindly be quashed and set aside, with direction to the respondent bank, to restore original post and status of petitioner, with all consequential service benefits.

(b) the impugned departmental enquiry proceedings, being carried out by the respondent Bank, against petitioner pursuance to the impugned Charge-sheet dated 14.05.2019 (Annexure-19), may very kindly be held to be unsustainable, being barred under principle of “Double Jeopardy”, and also due to bar contained under Regulation 43 of the Rajasthan Marudhara Gramin Bank (Officers and Employees) Service Regulation-2010 and consequently the same may kindly be ordered to be dropped, with direction to the respondent Bank, to treat the petitioner fairly and not to victimize him in relation to loan transaction issues, which are subject matter of criminal case, lodged by CBI, Jodhpur.

(c) By an appropriate writ order or direction in the nature thereof, the respondent Bank may kindly be directed to treat suspension period of petitioner, as on duty and petitioner may kindly be held entitled for all service benefits, attached to his post including full salary and whatever amount of salary has been forfeited/recovered by the respondent Bank from petitioner, in pursuance to impugned disciplinary enquiry and impugned punishment orde