SUDHIR KUMAR BHANDARI Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE brief facts of this case are as follows :

(2.) THE name of the applicant herein figured both in Paras -2(a) and 2(b) of the aforesaid memorandum. By para -2(a), the Central Vigilance Commission had advised major penalty proceedings against the applicant whereas vide para -2(b), the Central Vigilance Commission had advised obtaining the version of the officers concerned and submitting the case again to the Central Vigilance Commission for advice. Thus, there was apparent contradiction on the face of memorandum itself and hence, the applicant approached this Tribunal by filing OA No. 42/2011. The Tribunal, however, permitted the applicant to withdraw this OA vide their order dated 9 -2 -2011 with liberty to file a fresh. Thereafter, the applicant filed OA No. 59/2011. This was disposed of by the Tribunal on 5 -4 -2011 by the following orders :

(3.) IN pursuance of the order dated 5 -4 -2011 of this Tribunal in OA/59/2011, the applicant made a representation to the respondents with the following prayers :