As per case facts... The appellant, a Deputy General Manager with 34 years of blemishless service, was suspended ten months before his retirement for allegedly casual sanctioning of credit proposals. ... The Bank delayed issuing a charge sheet, claiming the matter was referred to the CVC for first-stage advice as per Regulation 19, with the Executive Director affirming a charge sheet would issue only after CVC advice. However, the Bank served the charge sheet without waiting for the CVC's advice, prompting the appellant to challenge the action. The question arose whether the Bank could issue a charge sheet without first receiving and considering the CVC's advice, after having explicitly accepted the necessity of such consultation. Finally, the Supreme Court held that once the Bank determined a case had a vigilance angle and chose to seek the CVC's first-stage advice, it was mandatory to wait for and consider that advice before issuing the charge sheet. Serving the charge sheet prematurely, particularly at the end of the appellant's career and contrary to the affidavit filed in court, was found to be mala fide and arbitrary. The disciplinary proceedings and charge sheet were quashed, and the appellant was granted all retiral benefits, but no back wages