IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) THURSDAY, THE SEVENTEENTH DAY OF APRIL TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE L.NARASIMHA REDDY WRIT PETITION No. 6018 of 2008 And W.P.M.P.No.9522 of 2008 Between: Mohd. Burhanuddin, S/o.Mohd. Jahangir, Asafia High School, Malakpet, Hyderabad R/o.Hyderabad. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 The Regional Joint Director of School Education, Andhra Pradesh, Hyderabad. 2 The District Educational Officer, Hyderabad District, Opposite Nizam College,Hyderabad. 3 The Managing Committee, Asafia High School, Malakpet, Hyderabad represented By its Chairman. 4 The Correspondent, Asafia High School, Malakpet, Hyderabad. .....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 particularly one in the nature of writ of mandamus declaring the proceedings of the Meeting of the Managing Committee held on 05-02-2008 and the consequently proceedings issued in L.No.40/2007-08 dated 05.03.2008 of the fourth respondent as illegal, arbitrary, violative of the principles of natural justice and also contrary to the A.P. Education Act and set aside the same and pass such other order or orders as this Hon'be Court deems fit and proper in the circumstances of the case. Counsel for the Petitioner: Mr.M.Panduranga Rao Counsel for the Respondents: G.P. for Education The Court made the following ORDER: The petitioner is working as School Assistant (Maths) in the third respondent High School, which is admitted into grant-in- aid. He is placed under suspension through an order, dated 05.03.2008, for a period of one year. This writ petition is filed assailing the same. After the writ petition was filed, the third respondent issued errata on 18.03.2008, modifying the duration of suspension from one year to two moths. W.P.M.P.No.9522 of 2005 is filed with a prayer to permit the petitioner to challenge the order, dated 18.03.2008, and the same is ordered. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner, the learned Government Pleader for School Education and the learned counsel for the fourth respondent. Apart from urging the ground as to the duration of period of suspension vis-à-vis Section 79 of A.P. Education Act, 1982 (for short ‘the Act’), the petitioner had raised grounds, touching on the merits of the matter also. In view of the fact that a full-fledged departmental enquiry is contemplated, this Court is not inclined to delve into the same. It is no doubt true that in the order of suspension, it was observed that the charges levelled against the petitioner are specific and well-documented, requiring no further investigation or enquiry. Such a statement is superfluous and the respondents cannot treat that the charges levelled against the petitioner are proved, at this stage. With the correction of the duration of the period of suspension, the grievance of the petitioner stands redressed to a substantial extent. The respondents would be under an obligation to complete the enquiry, particularly in view of the requirement under Section 79 of the Act. Hence, the writ petition is disposed of, directing the respondents to conclude the disciplinary proceedings against the petitioner, in accordance with the schedule stipulated under Section 79 of the Act and the petitioner shall also extend cooperation for the same. There shall be no order as to costs. ___________________ L.NARASIMHA REDDY,J Dt:17.04.2008. kdl ..... REGISTRAR // TRUE COPY // SECTION OFFICER To 1.2CCs to 2.2CD copies Form-NIC-OGS/WP{LS}