IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CWP. No. 18593 of 2010 Date of Decision: 12.10.2010. R.K. Malik --Petitioner Versus State of Haryana and others --Respondents CORAM:- HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE PERMOD KOHLI. Present:- Mr. D.S. Bali, Sr. Advocate with Mr. Salil Bali, Advocate for the petitioner. *** PERMOD KOHLI.J (ORAL) Notice of motion. Mr. R.D. Sharma, D.A.G., Haryana and Mr. A.K. Kansal, Advocate present in the Court have been asked to accept notice on behalf of respondents no.1 and 2 to 3 respectively. Keeping in view the nature of relief claimed and with the consent of learned counsel for the parties, this petition is being disposed of at the motion stage itself. The petitioner is an Executive Engineer in the H.U.D.A. He was placed under suspension vide order dated 3.12.2009 pending disciplinary inquiry against him. The aforesaid order was followed by issuance of the charge sheet dated 23.6.2010. The petitioner has challenged the suspension order as also the charge sheet in the present petition on variety of grounds including that those persons who are also charge sheeted along with him have been reinstated and in the criminal proceedings petitioner has not been arrayed as an accused. CWP. No. 18593 of 2010 -2- It is settled law that suspension is not a punishment. The disciplinary proceedings against the petitioner are already in progress. At this stage it is not appropriate and prudent to interfere in the disciplinary inquiry against the petitioner, however, the two facts are relevant. (1) The disciplinary proceedings are pending for the last more than one year since the date of issuance of the charge sheet. (2) The petitioner has been paid the subsistence allowance @ 50%. In view of the above circumstances, this petition is disposed of with a direction to respondent no.2 to ensure the completion of the disciplinary proceedings against the petitioner not later than four months. Respondent no.2 will also examine and if, the petitioner is not responsible for the prolongation of the disciplinary proceedings, the said respondent will consider enhancement of the subsistence allowance in accordance with the rules. In the event the disciplinary proceedings are not concluded within the aforesaid period, the petitioner shall be entitled to be reinstated pending disciplinary proceedings. Petitioner will associate with the disciplinary proceedings and if, he is found responsible for prolongation of the disciplinary proceedings within the aforesaid period, the respondents shall be at liberty to proceed according to law. (PERMOD KOHLI) JUDGE 12.10.2010. lucky