1. This writ petition has been filed by the petitioner praying for issuance of a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, to call for the records of the 1st respondent in Lr.No.42746/ Pol.2/2013-25, dated 30.12.2014 and to quash the same and to direct the respondents to permit the petitioner to rejoin duty as Deputy Superintendent of Police, subject to the result in C.C.No.16 of 2014 dated 21.05.2014 on the file of the Special Court under the Prevention of Corruption Act, Trichirapalli.

2. In the affidavit filed in support of the writ petition, it has been averred by the petitioner as follows:-

2.1 The petitioner was appointed as Sub-Inspector of Police in Category-I, in November, 1987 and he was promoted as Inspector of Police in the year 1998 and further, promoted as Deputy Superintendent of Police in the year 2010 and posted as Assistant Commissioner at Royapuram, then at Tambaram. During the year 2011, he was posted at District Crime Record Beareu and then, in March 2012, he was posted as D.S.P., Lalgudi, Trichy District, controlling Five Sub-Stations, Lalgudi, Kallagudi, Kolladam, Samayapuram and Siraganur Police Station. While so, during the year 2012, a criminal case in Crime No.11 of 2012 was filed against the petitioner herein and one Chandramohan, Sub-Inspector of Police, by the Vigilance and Anti-corruption Department, Trichy for the alleged offence under Section 12 and 13(2) r/w 13(1)(d) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, on the allegation that the petitioner demanded a sum of Rs.25,000/- as gratification from the defacto-complainant Rajamanickam, for giving him a Verification Report under Foreign Contribution Regulation Act, 1976. Subsequent to the registration of the said criminal case, the petitioner herein was placed under suspension vide, G.O.2D.208, Home (Pol.2) Department, dated 27.07.2012. In the said criminal case, the investigation was completed and charge-sheet was also filed. Now, the said criminal case is posted for trial for examination of the prosecution witnesses.

2.2 Earlier, challenging the suspension order, the petitioner had filed a writ petition in W.P.No.21014 of 2013 before this Court. While disposing the said writ petition, this Court by order dated 08.04.2014 directed the petitioner to give a representation to the 1st respondent for revocation of suspension order and for his reinstatement and this Court further directed the 1st respondent to consider the representation of the petitioner and to reinstate the petitioner in any non-sensitive post at a far away place. Aggrieved over the said order, the respondents filed an appeal in W.A.No.1552 of 2014 against the order in W.P.No.21014 of 2013. The said writ appeal was disposed of by the Division Bench of this Court, permitting the petitioner to give representation to the respondent within one week and further, the Division Bench directed the authorities to consider the petitioner's representation within two weeks. Thereafter, the petitioner made a representation to the 1st respondent on 17.12.2012. The 1st respondent, by the impugned order dated 30.12.2014 has rejected the representation of the petitioner stating that the petitioner who was arrested red-handed in the act of demand and acceptance of bribe and facing criminal proceedings, should not be allowed to rejoin duty in the interest of probity in public administration and in the interest of public service as the morale of other public servants would be affected. Hence, the petitioner has come forward with the present writ petition before this Court.

3. When the matter is taken up for consideration, the learned senior counsel for the petitioner, by placing reliance on two judgments reported in 1991 Writ L.R. 273 [Ambigapathy, P.S. Vs. The Director of Public Health & Preventive Medicine) and 2015 (2) SCALES 432 [Ajay Kumar Choudhry Vs. Union of India], submitted that the currency of suspension order should not be extended beyond three months, if within this period, the Memorandum of charges/c