5) While the petitioner was serving as Area Manager, CSD Depot, Ambala the CBI on 30.06.2012 carried out a raid at the office and residence of certain officials of the CSD at Mumbai and Ambala, including the respondent. The CBI on 03.12.2012 lodged an FIR against the respondent and two others and they were arrested. Pursuant to CBI’s said FIR dated 03.12.2012,Case No. R.C. BAI/2012/A0042 was registered under Section 11 read with Section 12 of the Prevention of the Corruption Act, 1988.

6) In the meanwhile, the CBI by its letter No. DP 026 2013/3905/RC-42(A) dated 24.12.2013 asked the petitioners to initiate disciplinary action/RDA (Regular Departmental Action) against the respondent for a major penalty.

7) Because of registration of FIR dated 03.12.2012 by the CBI, the petitioner Department by an order dated 15.03.2013 placed the respondent under suspension in terms of Rule 10(1)(b) of the CCS(CCA)Rules, 1965against which the respondent on 16.03.20123 filed a representation. The respondent challenged the said order of his suspension dated 15.03.213 before CAT, Chandigarh in OA-383-HR-2013. Initially on 18.03.2013 CAT, Chandigarh stayed the said order dated 15.03.213 by which the respondent was suspended from service.

8) Later, on 27.05.2014 said OA-383-HR-2013 of the respondent was disposed of by CAT, Chandigarh Branch with a direction to the present petitioners to consider and decide the pending representation of the respondent within a period of one month from the date of receipt of certified copy of the said order and the respondent on 09.06.2014 submitted the said order dated

27.05.2013 before the petitioners as directed.

9) Thereafter, by order dated 06.08.2014 the petitioners rejected the representation of the respondent and by the said order dated 06.08.2014 again placed the respondent under suspension. Aggrieved with the said order of dated 06.08.2014 of the petitioners, the respondent preferred O.A. No. 060/00715/2014 before CAT, Chandigarh Branch.

10) After hearing the petitioners and the respondent learned CAT, Chandigarh Branch by order dated 25.11.2014 allowed the said O.A. No. 060/00715/2014 preferred by the respondent, setting aside the order dated 06.08.2014 passed by the petitioners against the respondent, remitting the matter back to the petitioners to give a fresh look in the light that was observed by the said Tribunal in its said order dated 25.11.2014 and directing the petitioners to pass a reasoned speaking order in accordance with rules and law.

11) In the meanwhile, on completion of the investigation of its R.C.No. 42/A/2012 pursuant to its FIR dated 03.12.2012, the CBI on 21.07.2014 submitted the chargesheet under Sections 11/12 of the Prevention of the Corruption Act, 1988, wherein the respondent is one of the named accused. In pursuance of the same, Special Case No. 55/2014 under Sections 11/12 of said 1988 Act was registered before the learned Special Judge (CBI), City Civil & Sessions Court, Greater Bombay.

12) The respondent in said Special Case No. 55/2014 filed an application for his Discharge stating that the chargesheet dated 21.07.2014 submitted by the CBI in the case does not contain the required ingredients of Sections 11 and 12 of the Prevention of the Corruption Act, 1988. The learned Special Judge (CBI), City Civil & Sessions Court, Greater Bombay by order dated 15.06.2017 passed in said Special Case No. 55/2014, rejected the said Discharge application of the respondent, against which he preferred Criminal Writ Petition No. 2864/2017 before the Hon’ble Bombay High Court.

13) While the said Special Case No. 55/2014 with discharge application of the respondent was pending before the learned Special Judge (CBI), City Civil & Sessions Court, Greater Bombay, the petitioners on 21.04.2017 issued a Memorandum of Charge under Rule 14 of the CCS (CCA) Rules, 1965 asking him to submit his written statement of his defence within 10 (ten) days of receipt of the same stating as to whether he desires to be he