IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA, CHANDIGARH Civil Writ Petition No.11782 of 2010 Date of Decision: July 07, 2010 Hardev Singh .....PETITIONER(S) VERSUS State of Punjab & Others .....RESPONDENT(S) . . . CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AJAI LAMBA PRESENT: - Mr. A.D.S. Ghuman, Advocate, for the petitioner. . . . AJAI LAMBA, J (Oral) 1. Challenge in this petition filed under Article 226/227 of the Constitution of India is to Order dated 25.5.2010 (Annexure P-5). Learned counsel contends that the order has been passed in malafide exercise of powers by the Senior Superintendent of Police, Gurdaspur. 2. I have considered the contention of the learned counsel. 3. In relation to allegation of malafide, as argued by the learned counsel, the Senior Superintendent of Police, has not been impleaded by name and therefore no judicial CWP No.11782 of 2010 [2] notice of the same can be taken, in the facts and circumstances of the case. 4. Vide impugned order, Annexure P-5, while noticing the misconduct of the petitioner, services of the petitioner have been placed under suspension. Regular enquiry has been ordered with the stipulation that the same would be concluded within three months from the date of issue of impugned order, Annexure P-5. In such circumstances, I do not find any arbitrary exercise of power. 5. The allegations as brought out from the impugned order also do not entitle the petitioner to any relief. The allegations are not being dealt with so as not to prejudice the authorities below in conduct of regular enquiry. 6. In view of the above, no interference in writ jurisdiction is made out. 7. The petition is dismissed. (AJAI LAMBA) July 07, 2010 JUDGE avin 1. To be referred to the Reporters or not? 2. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest?