HONOURABLE SMT. JUSTICE T.MEENA KUMARI & HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE G. CHANDRAIAH WRIT PETITION No:16223 OF 2007 Dated:09.08.2007 Between: 1.The Director, Central Bureau of Investigation, Lodhi Road, New Delhi & others ..Petitioners And M.V.Ramanaiah ..Respondent. HONOURABLE SMT. JUSTICE T.MEENA KUMARI & HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE G. CHANDRAIAH WRIT PETITION No:16223 OF 2007 ORDER: (per Hon’ble Smt. Justice T. Meena Kumari) The present writ petition is filed by the petitioners challenging the order of the Tribunal dated 5.10.2006 passed in O.A.No.1028 of 2002. The petitioners herein are the respondents and the respondent herein is the applicant before the Tribunal. On the O.A. filed by the applicant seeking to set aside the order No:455 of 2002, dated 15.4.2002 after declaring the same as arbitrary, illegal and unjust and consequently, to direct the respondents to reinstate the applicant with all consequential benefits such as arrears of pay etc. The Tribunal having observed that the impugned termination order No:455 of 2002, dated 15.4.2002 is not an order of termination simpliciter, but has been taken as a simple way out for ending the Discipline and Appeal Rules proceedings under way against the applicant and since the post of special public prosecutor to which the applicant was selected by the Union Public Service Commission has been designated as Group A post, the competency to terminate the applicant’s appointment vests with the President of Union of India only and as such the termination orders No:455 of 2002, dated 15.4.2002, is invalid, quashed the proceedings giving liberty to the respondents to complete the proceedings under CCS (CCA) Rules initiated against the applicant while directing to reinstate the applicant back into his erstwhile post by duly considering the intervening period as duty for all purposes. Having aggrieved by the same, the present writ petition is preferred by the respondents. Heard the learned Special Public Prosecutor for CBI and and the learned Counsel for the respondent-applicant. The learned Special Public Prosecutor contended that disciplinary proceedings are still pending and it is fairly conceded that the DPC recommended for termination of the applicant. On a perusal of the material available on record and the order impugned, it is obvious that pursuant to the recommendations made by the DPC, the termination orders were issued. There is no material on record as to the competency of the DPC to recommend termination of the applicant. In that view of the matter and in the facts and circumstances of the case, We concur with the findings of the Tribunal and we do not see any reason to entertain this writ petition. But, in view of the fact that the disciplinary proceedings are still pending against the applicant, We feel it appropriate to direct the petitioners- authorities to reinstate the applicant as ordered by the tribunal and complete the disciplinary proceedings pending, if any, within a period of three months from the date of joining of the applicant. Subject to the above direction, this writ petition is disposed of. ________________________ Justice T. Meena Kumari ______________________ Justice G. Chandraiah Date: 9th August, 2007 Nn/Gurc. HONOURABLE SMT. JUSTICE T.MEENA KUMARI & HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE G. CHANDRAIAH WRIT PETITION No:16223 OF 2007 (Order delivered by the Hon’ble Smt. Justice T. Meena Kumari) 9/08/2007