THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE L. NARASIMHA REDDY WRIT PETITION No.4487 of 2011 ORDER: The petitioner is employed as a Clerk in the State Bank of Hyderabad. Through order, dated 30.10.2010, the Assistant General Manager, 2nd respondent herein placed her under suspension. On 13.12.2010, she was served with a memo, to the effect that she has committed 20 instances of fraud involving huge amounts. The petitioner challenges the order of suspension. She contends that the allegations against her are not correct and that there is no basis for placing her under suspension. It is also stated that the respondents have adopted different yardsticks in the matter of directing reinstatement of suspended employees. Reference is made to the case of one Mr.Dharma Rao, erstwhile Branch Manager, Anakapalle. On behalf of the respondents, a counter affidavit is filed. The circumstances, under which the petitioner was placed under suspension, are narrated. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Standing Counsel for the respondents. The petitioner was placed under suspension on the ground that as many as 20 instances of misappropriation or irregularities are noticed against her. It is the prerogative of an employer to place an employee under suspension pending enquiry. The petitioner has drawn parity with one Mr. Dharma Rao. It is stated that the said employee was placed under suspension on the ground that he was arrested by police and when it was brought to the notice of the Bank that the employee was not involved in the alleged irregularities, he was reinstated into service. This Court cannot express any opinion as to whether the petitioner deserves to be reinstated, even while the enquiry is pending. If she is so advised, she too can make a representation and the 2nd respondent shall pass appropriate orders within a period of two months from the date of receipt of the representation. This in turn shall be without prejudice to the right of the respondents to proceed with the departmental enquiry. The writ petition is disposed of with the above observation. There shall be no order as to costs. __________ 23.09.2011 JSU THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE L. NARASIMHA REDDY WRIT PETITION No.4487 of 2011 Date: 23.09.2011 JSU