THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE R.SUBHASH REDDY WRIT PETITION NO.19601 OF 2009 Dated 22nd September, 2009 Between: P.Shibu Kumar …Petitioner and The Deputy Inspector General of Police And another …Respondents The Court made the following O R D E R: This writ petition is filed by the petitioner, who is a Sub- Inspector in Central Reserve Police Force (for short “CRPF”), questioning the validity of the Office Order dated 06.07.2009, by which he was placed under suspension pending enquiry in view of Rule 27A of the CRPF Rules, 1955. The case of the petitioner is that, while he was working as Sub-Inspector in CRPF, he was handed over the charge of Commander of A/42 battalion and under him three platoons were working i.e., Machavaram, Macherla and Bellamkonda. During which period, there was a complaint against two Constables alleging that they went to the bus shelter of Machavaram and forcibly caught hold of a woman, who is insane, and misbehaved with her. In connection with the said incident, the petitioner was placed under suspension on the charges that he failed to exercise supervision and control over the activities of the platoon personnel, which resulted in the occurrence of the above said incident, which is prejudicial to the good order an discipline of the Force and that he did not inform his superior officers immediately about the occurrence of the incident and thereby failed to perform his duties in a responsible manner. It is contended by the learned counsel for the petitioner that there was no misconduct on the part of the petitioner so as to place him under suspension and that the impugned order was passed as an offshoot of the writ petition filed by the petitioner, when he was deprived of promotion. Since the impugned order is suspension pending enquiry; whether the petitioner was negligent in supervising the activities of the platoon personnel and whether there was any failure on his part in reporting the incident to the higher officers are matters of enquiry to be conducted. Hence, at this stage, it cannot be said that there was no misconduct on the part of the petitioner and that the impugned order was passed as an offshoot of the writ petition filed by him. In that view of the matter, I do not find any illegality in the order impugned to interfere with the same. But, having regard to the nature of the allegations and further as the suspension order was passed about more than three months back, I deem it appropriate to dispose of the writ petition directing the respondents to complete the enquiry, within a period of three (3) months from today. If the respondents fail to conclude the enquiry within the above stipulated period, they shall consider for reviewing the order of suspension and take appropriate decision in the matter. Subject to the above directions, the writ petition is disposed of. No order as to costs. ____________________ R.SUBHASH REDDY, J Dated 22nd September, 2009 vrn