IN THE HIGH COURT JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD FRIDAY, THE SECOND DAY OF DECEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND ELEVEN PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE G.CHANDRAIAH W.P. No.31696 of 2011 Between: K.Sekhar … Petitioner And The Project Director, DWMA, Ranga Reddy District and another. … Respondents THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE G.CHANDRAIAH W.P. No.31696 of 2011 ORDER: This writ petition has been ﬁled seeking for issuance of Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the respondents in not passing ﬁnal orders, pursuant to the proceedings dated 28.07.2011 in which the petitioner was suspended, even after four months, as illegal, arbitrary and violation of Guidelines and directions of this Court and consequently direct the respondents to reinstate the petitioner into Field Assistant duties at Raghavapur Village, Yalal Mandal, Ranga Reddy District. The case of the petitioner, in brief, is that he was appointed as Field Assistant under National Rural Employment Guarantee Scheme on contract basis at Raghavapur Village, Yalal Mandal, Ranga Reddy District in the year 2006. While so, the 1st respondent, Project Director, issued proceedings dated 28.07.2011, placing the petitioner under suspension on the allegation of misappropriation of Government funds. Questioning the same, the petitioner ﬁled W.P. No.22851 of 2011 and the same was partly allowed leaving it open to the respondents to initiate disciplinary proceedings against the petitioner and by directing that no amount shall be recovered from him until final orders are passed in the enquiry. The present writ petition is ﬁled questioning inaction on the part of the respondents in passing the ﬁnal orders pursuant to the suspension proceedings dated 28.07.2011. The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner was placed under suspension vide proceedings dated 28.07.2011 on the allegation of misappropriation of funds but thereafter, though the petitioner ﬁled a writ petition before this Court, which was partly allowed, no ﬁnal orders have been passed so far. Hence, the present writ petition. On the other hand, the learned counsel for the respondents would submit that having regard to the allegations made against the petitioner, he was placed under suspension and the enquiry is in progress. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned counsel for the respondents and perused the material on record. Admittedly, the petitioner was placed under suspension vide proceedings dated 28.07.2011 on the allegation of misappropriation of funds. Questioning which, the petitioner ﬁled writ petition and this Court while partly allowing the said writ petition held as stated hereinabove. Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case and the submissions made by the learned counsel on either side and also having regard to the nature of the relief sought for in the instant writ petition, I am of the view that this writ petition can be disposed of as under. The respondents are directed to conclude the enquiry and pass appropriate orders, in accordance with law, as expeditiously as possible, preferably within a period of two months, from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. Further, the respondents also directed to consider the case of the petitioner for payment of subsistence allowance and pay the same forthwith, in accordance with law, if he is eligible. With the above direction, this writ petition is disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs. _________________________ JUSTICE G.CHANDRAIAH Date: 02.12.2011 LSK