IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL Writ Petition (S/B) No. 99 of 2010 Om Pal Singh …….Petitioner. Versus State of Uttarakhand and others. …Respondents. Mr. Naveet Kaushik, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. P.C. Bisht, Advocate for the respondents. Coram: Hon’ble J.S. Khehar, C.J. Hon’ble Sudhanshu Dhulia, J. J.S. Khehar, C.J, (Oral) 1. Although in the first instance, learned counsel for the petitioner made efforts to assail the impugned order of suspension dated 26.5.2010 (Annexure -4), yet during the later course of his submissions, it was contended that the petitioner would be satisfied, if the respondents were directed to complete the departmental proceedings initiated / contemplated against the petitioner, within a reasonable time. 2. When confronted, learned counsel for the respondents states that the departmental proceedings initiated / contemplated against the petitioner shall be positively concluded within six months from today, provided the petitioner cooperates in the said proceedings. 3. In view of the above, the instant Writ Petition is disposed of with a direction to the respondents to ensure the completion of the departmental proceedings against the petitioner on or before 31.12.2010. In case, the departmental proceedings against the petitioner are not completed within the aforesaid time, the order of 2 suspension dated 26.5.2010 will be deemed to have been revoked and the petitioner shall be deemed to have been reinstated in service. Needless to mention that this direction will be enforceable if the petitioner cooperates in the proceedings. (Sudhanshu Dhulia, J.) (J.S. Khehar, C.J.) 15.6.2010 Rathour