IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) WEDNESDAY, THE THIRTIETH DAY OF JULY TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE L.NARASIMHA REDDY WRIT PETITION NO : 16060 of 2008 Between: N. Rama Murthy S/o Krishna Murthy D. No. 12/388, Upstairs, Hanumappa Street, Kadapa, Kadapa District. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 Andhra Pragathi Grameena Bank, rep by its Area Chairman, Head Office, Post Box No. 65, Kadapa-516001, Kadapa District. 2 Andhra Pragathi Grameena Bank, rep by its Regional Manager, Kadapa-516001, Kadapa District. 3 Andhra Pragathi Grameena Bank, ' Rayavaram Branch, Rayavaram, T. Sundupalle Mandal, Kadapa District, rep by its Branch Manager. 4 Rayalaseema Grameena Bank, rep by its Area Manager, Rajampet Area, Kadapa District. .....RESPONDENT(S) 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 an order, Writ or direction more particualrly one inthe nature of writ of mandamus, declaring the impugned suspension proceedings under Ref. No. 267/A/STF/0003/07, dt 28/05/2007, issued by 1st respondent, suspending the petitioner, as illegal, arbitrary and unconstitutional and consequently set a side the sameand pass such other order or orders. Counsel for the Petitioner:MR.S.S.BHATT Counsel for the Respondent No.: V.UMA DEVI The Court made the following : THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE L.NARASIMHA REDDY WRIT PETITION NO : 16060 of 2008 ORDER: The petitioner is employed as a Manager in Andhra Pragathi Grameena Bank. Through order, dated 28.05.2007, 1st respondent herein placed the petitioner under suspension. Thereafter, a charge sheet was issued on 01.09.2007. The petitioner challenges the order of suspension, dated 28.05.2007, on several grounds. He contends that even before the order of suspension, he was relieved from duties, and the charge sheet itself came to be issued nearly four months after the suspension. He further contends that the charges are vague and the order of suspension is passed with a mala fide intention. Reference is made to the application submitted by the petitioner under the Right to Information Act. Petitioner also complains that he is not being paid subsistence allowance in accordance with the relevant rules. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Standing Counsel for the respondents. It is very rare that this Court would interfere with the orders of suspension pending enquiry. It is only when the order of suspension is passed by an authority not vested with the power or where no case can be discerned, even if the allegations contained in the charge sheet are taken on their face value, that this Court would consider the feasibility of interfering with the same. In the instant case, it is no doubt true that the suspension preceded the charge sheet. However, if the charge sheet is perused, it cannot be said that there was no basis for placing the petitioner under suspension. As regards the complaint of the petitioner that he is not being paid the subsistence allowance, it needs to be observed that the 1st respondent himself mentioned the quantum of subsistence allowance, that is to be paid from time to time. Therefore, the petitioner cannot be denied the quantum mentioned in the impugned order as well as the relevant rules. Further, charge sheet was issued and enquiry officer was also appointed. The disciplinary proceedings cannot be continued indefinitely. They need to be given a quietus as early as possible. Hence, the writ petition is disposed of, directing that – (a) the petitioner shall be paid the subsistence allowance at the rate specified in the relevant rules; and (b) the disciplinary proceedings initiated against the petitioner shall be concluded, within a period of three (3) months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. There shall be no order as to costs. _________ 30.07.2008 Note: Issue C.C. in three days. (B/o) JSU ..... REGISTRAR // TRUE COPY // SECTION OFFICER To 1.2CCs to 2.2CD copies Form-NIC-OGS/WP{TRT} THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE L.NARASIMHA REDDY WRIT PETITION NO : 16060 of 2008 Date: 30.07.2008 JSU