HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE K.C.BHANU WRIT PETITION No.15617 of 2011 Date of Order:10.06.2011 Between: G.Srinivas ..Petitioner and Jnana Saraswathi Ammavari Temple, Basara, rep. by its Executive Officers and another ..Respondents The Court made the following Order: HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE K.C.BHANU WRIT PEITTION No.15617 of 2011 ORDER :- This writ petition is filed by the petitioner seeking to issue a writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the 1st respondent in not obeying the appellate authority’s orders passed under Section 37(3)(b) of the Endowments Act as illegal and arbitrary and consequently direct the 1st respondent to strictly adhere to the orders passed by the 2nd respondent in appeal No.1/2011, dated 11.05.2011, by reinstating the petitioner forthwith and complete the enquiry. 2. The petitioner was working as Superintendent in Sri Jnana Saraswathi Devasthanam, Basara. The 1st respondent has issued proceedings vide Rc.No.B842/2010, dated 23.04.2011, framing certain charges against the petitioner and also placed him under suspension. As against the order of suspension, the petitioner preferred an appeal before the Founder Family Member of the Temple i.e., the 2nd respondent. The 2nd respondent revoked the suspension order directing the Executive Officer to admit the individual into duty forthwith and report compliance. Though the 2nd respondent revoked the suspension order, the 1st respondent has not implemented the said order. Hence, the writ petition. 3. An employee of the respondent Temple can be suspended by the competent authority in case of serious misconduct on his part in discharging his duties. After the suspension of the petitioner, a charge memo was issued levelling certain charges with reference to discharging of his official duties and explanation was called for. The petitioner submitted a detailed explanation to the charges levelled against him. As the explanation is not satisfactory, a regular Enquiry Officer was appointed to conduct regular departmental enquiry in accordance with law. The suspension pending enquiry cannot be made as a matter of course, unless there are some serious allegations of misconduct levelled against the petitioner. All the allegations are with reference to the discharge of his duties with reference to the Temple. After coming to the conclusion that the charges are defective, vague and are not connected to the duty chart of the petitioner, the appellate authority revoked the suspension order. It is not for the appellate authority to decide the question of fact, which is the primary concern of the Enquiry Officer to go into the allegations levelled against the petitioner. Ordinarily this court would not interfere with the suspension order unless certain mala fides are attributed against the Officer who placed the petitioner under suspension. No such allegations are levelled against disciplinary authority. There cannot be any dispute that an order of suspension can only be made after the disciplinary/appointing authority comes to the conclusion that there is sufficient reasons for keeping an employee under suspension i.e., in other words there has to be a proper application of mind and satisfaction that suspension is called in a given case. Further more, the petitioner is no other than the son-in-law of the Founder Family Member of the subject Devastanam. Therefore, in all fairness the appellate authority ought not to have revoked the suspension order, since the Found Family Member has got some interest in the lis. Therefore, there is no need to give any direction in view of the fact that the appellate authority ought not to have passed such an order. The writ petition is devoid of merit and is liable to be dismissed. 4. Accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed. However, it is desirable to direct the Enquiry Officer to complete the enquiry within a period of six months from the date of issuing charge memo in accordance with law after giving reasonable opportunity to the petitioner. There shall be no order as to costs. ______________ K.C. BHANU, J June 10, 2011 lmv HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE K.C.BHANU WRIT PETITION No.15617 of 2011 Date: 10.06.2011 LMV