1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR -------------------------------------------------------- CIVIL WRIT No. 2747 of 2006 SATYA DEV CHOUHAN V/S MARWAR GRAMIN BANK,PALI & ORS. Mr. BV THANVI, for the appellant / petitioner Date of Order : 26.5.2006 HON'BLE SHRI N P GUPTA,J. ORDER ----- Heard learned counsel for the petitioner. The first submission made by the learned counsel is that the petitioner has been placed under suspension by the General Manager, while according to the Regulations it is the Chairman only who could place the petitioner under suspension. I have considered the submission. A look at Annexure-9 the suspension order shows that it has been passed by the Chairman only, and not by the General Manager. Therefore, this contention does not hold good. The other submission made is that in the enquiry proceedings the petitioner demanded to be supplied copies 2 of certain documents, and that prayer has been declined vide Annexure-13, which is wrong. In my view as the enquiry is going on, in that view of the matter, if the petitioner feels that on account of non supply of the documents, enquiry is not proper, or there has been a violation of principles of natural justice, it would obviously be open to the petitioner to assail the enquiry proceedings, and the ultimate order on that ground, in appropriate manner, before appropriate authority, in accordance with law. The next submission made is that on account of the pendency of the departmental enquiry, the petitioner's bank account has been sealed, inasmuch as, even the deposits made by him are not being allowed to be withdrawn by the petitioner. Suffice it to say that in this regard I do not find any material on record to show that the petitioner has been so prevented from withdrawing the amount lying in his account with the Bank. Thus, I do not find any force in the writ petition. The same is, therefore, dismissed summarily. 3 ( N P GUPTA ),J. /Sushil/