Hon’ble Rajan Roy, J.—Heard Shri R.B.Singhal, learned senior advocate, Assistant Solicitor General of India, assisted by Shri Praveen Shukla for the petitioners and Shri Satish Chaturvedi, learned counsel appearing for the respondents.

2. All the aforesaid writ petitions involve a common issue, therefore, they have been clubbed together and are being decided by a common judgment.

3. Writ Petition No. 20024 of 2014 was heard as the leading petition.

4. Private respondents in all the aforesaid petitions are alleged to be involved in a case of fraud at Banda Head Post Office, involving embezzlement of Government money from its R.D. Accounts amounting to Rs. 1,25,26,582-50 (One crore twenty five lakh twenty six thousand five hundred eighty two and odd)

5. The private respondents were placed under suspension vide order dated 19.5.2009 in contemplation of disciplinary proceedings against them in view of their involvement in the aforesaid fraud and embezzlement. Two First Information Reports were lodged on 9.6.2009 against them. As the suspension orders were valid only for a period of 90 days, under Rule 10 (7) of the Central Civil Services (Classification, Control and Appeal) Rules, 1965, (for short CCA Rules, 1965) therefore, a proposal for extension of the suspension order was moved on 5.8.2009. The said proposal is said to have been approved by the competent authority on12/13.8.2009, who is also said to be the Chairman of the Suspension Review Committee. The matter was placed before the Suspension Review Committee on 24.8.2009. On 25.8.2009, the Review Committee approved the extension of the suspension order of the private respondents.

6. On 24.10.2009, a charge-sheet was issued to the private respondents under rule 14 of CCA Rules, 1965 in the departmental proceedings.

7. The respondents filed appeal/representation before the respondent No. 2 against the order of suspension dated 19.5.2009. Initially the suspension order dated 19.5.2009 was reviewed and is said to have been extended by the competent authority on 25.8.2009, thereafter it was further extended from time to time.

8. On 5.6.2010, a charge-sheet was filed by the concerned police in the Court of criminal jurisdiction with regard to the above mentioned fraud and embezzlement in which the respondents before us were the accused. On 28.10.2010, summoning orders were issued by the said Court. Being aggrieved, the respondents filed applications under Section 482 Cr.P.C. before the High Court sitting at Lucknow, which were numbered separately as Criminal Misc. Application Nos. 5128 of 2010, 5129 of 2010, 5130 of 2010 and 4638 of 2010. While entertaining the aforesaid applications, this Court passed interim orders to the effect that no coercive steps will be taken as against the accused petitioners. The said interim order is said to be continuing till date. In view of the above, the criminal trial has not proceeded.

9. As the criminal trial is pending, therefore, the disciplinary proceedings have also not proceeded.

10. As the appeal of the respondents against their continued suspension was not decided, they filed Original Application No. 264 of 2012 before the Central Administrative Tribunal, which was disposed of on 28.2.2012 with a direction to decide the pending appeal of the respondents within a period of three months by a reasoned and speaking order in light of Rules of 1965. In compliance thereof, the appeals of respondents were decided in January, 2013.

11. Being aggrieved, the petitioners filed the Original Applications which have been allowed by the Tribunal on various dates by means of the impugned judgements and the initial suspension order dated 19.5.2009 and the appellate order dated 22.1.2013 have been quashed being invalid.

12. According to the Tribunal, the initial suspension order was not reviewed within a period of 90 days, which was mandatory, consequently, a direction has been issued by the Tribunal to reinstate the respondent No. 1 in all the writ