IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD MONDAY, THE EIGHTEENTH DAY OF AUGUST TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE R.SUBHASH REDDY WRIT PETITION NO : 19265 of 1999 Between: 1 Bandaru Nookaraju, (died), S/o. Matanna, R/o.Vinjumvari Street, Pithapuram, East Godavari District. 2 Smt. B.Simahchalam, W/o. Late B.Nooka Raju, R/o.Vinjumvari Street, Pithapuram, East Godavari District. ..... PETITIONERS AND 1 The President/Chairman, The Pithapuram Co-op Urban Bank Ltd., Main Road, Pittapuram - 533 450. 2 The Pittapuram Co-op Urban Bank Ltd., Reptd. by its Secretary, Main Road, Pittapuram 533 450. .....RESPONDENTS Petition under Article 226 of the constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the Affidavit filed herein the High Court will be pleased to issue a Writ, Order or Direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus herein keeping the petitioner herein under prolonged suspension pending enquiry pursuant to the proceedings dated 17-10-1992 of the 1st respondent as illegal and arbitrary and consequently reinstate the petitioner with all back wages, continuity of service by setting aside the proceedings dated 17-10- 1992. Counsel for the Petitioner :MR.S.V.BHATT Counsel for the Respondents : MR.G.RAVI MOHAN The Court made the following : HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE R.SUBHASH REDDY WRIT PETITION NO : 19265 of 1999 ORDER : In this writ petition, the petitioner, who is working as watchman in the respondent – Co-operative Urban Bank, has questioned the order dated 17th October 1992, by which, he was placed under suspension. 2. Though there is no indication about pendency of any inquiry against the petitioner, but in the counter affidavit filed on behalf of the respondents, it is stated that consequent to the suspension order dated 17th October 1992, a Charge Memo was issued to the petitioner, and inquiry was also conducted, but however, no final orders have been passed so far. 3. This writ petition is of the year 1999 and it is not known whether any final orders are passed in the inquiry said to have been initiated against the petitioner. Even the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner is not aware whether any final orders are passed or not. However, this Court has stayed the order of suspension on 3rd February 2000. 4. Asmuch as the order of suspension passed against the petitioner was suspended by this Court as early as on 3rd February 2000, and the said order is in force all along, I dispose of the writ petition, directing the respondents to pass appropriate final orders in the inquiry initiated against the petitioner, as expeditiously as possible, if not already passed. Further, I direct that the interim order passed by this Court on 3rd February 2000 shall continue to operate till appropriate final orders are passed in the inquiry. It is made clear that final orders shall be passed basing on the merits of the inquiry, without being influenced either by the interim orders passed by this Court earlier, or by any observations made by this Court in this order. 5. Writ petition is accordingly disposed of. No order as to costs. __________________ 18th August 2008 ajr To 1 The President/Chairman, The Pithapuram Co-op Urban Bank Ltd., Main Road, Pittapuram - 533 450. 2 The Secretary, The Pittapuram Co-op Urban Bank Ltd., Main Road, Pittapuram 533 450.