IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) TUESDAY, THE TWELFTH DAY OF AUGUST TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE L.NARASIMHA REDDY WRIT PETITION NO : 17515 of 2008 Between: D.Ramjee S/o. Krishna Rao, Macharla Municipality, Guntur District. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 The Collector & Executive Director, A.P.State Housing Corporation Ltd., District Unit, Guntur District. 2 The Distirct Manager, A.P.State Housing Corporation Ltd., Guntur. 3 The Managing Director, A.P.State Housing Corporation Ltd., 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 more in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the impugned order bearing Procgs. Rc.No.374/08-H2, dated 13.5.2008 of the 1st respondent as void, illegal, arbitrary, discriminatory and without jurisdiction and set aside the same with all consequential benefits. Counsel for the Petitioner:MR.S.JAGADISH Counsel for the Respondents: MR.K.MOHAN RAMI REDDY The Court made the following : ORDER: The petitioner is working as Assistant Technical Work Inspector in the Guntur unit of A.P. State Housing Corporation Limited. Through order, dated 13.05.2008, the first respondent placed him under suspension. It was alleged that the petitioner had committed financial irregularities and misused cement in Macherla Urban Area. The petitioner challenges the same. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Standing Counsel for the respondents. On the allegation that the petitioner resorted to financial irregularities and misuse of cement, the first respondent placed him under suspension. The truth, or otherwise, of the allegations against the petitioner needs to be established in the departmental enquiry. For the present, it cannot be said that there is no basis for placing him under suspension. Further, three months have already elapsed and the disciplinary proceedings initiated against the petitioner can be concluded within a reasonable time. Hence, the Writ Petition is disposed of, directing the first respondent to conclude the disciplinary proceedings within three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. There shall be no order as to costs. ____________________ Dt.12.08.2008 L.NARASIMHA REDDY, J GJ