1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR. W.P. No. 283 of 2008. Ku. Malti Bisen Ilame Vs. Adhyapak Vidya Mandal Tumsar and another. Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram appearances, Court's orders or directions Court's or Judge's Orders and Registrar's orders. Shr A. Z. Zibhkate Advocate for the petitioner. Shri N. S. Khubalkar, AGP for R-2. Shri Anand Deshpande, Advocate for R-1. Coram : B.H. Marlapalle and A.H. Joshi, JJ. Dated : 25th November, 2008. We have heard Mr. Bhangde, the Learned Senior Counsel with Mr. Jibhkate for the petitioner. Mr. Anand Deshande Learned Advocate appears for Respondent no.1 and learned AGP Mr.Khubalkar appears for Respondent No.2. The petitioner who is Head Mistress of Saraswati Kanya Vidyalaya, Nadadongri, run by the respondent no.1 Society was suspended by an order dated 13-1-2008 and 2 without the approval by Respondent no.2. As per the Learned Counsel for the respondent Society, the petitioner was issued chargesheet on 21-4-2008 and till now the enquiry is in progress. The enquiry was required to be completed ordinarily within a period of 120 days as per M. E. P. S. Rules. It was also pointed out by the petitioner that she was not paid suspension allowance during the entire period of suspension. The petitioner further alleges that the suspension order is issued with malice, and the respondent society had determined to ensure that she was kept away from the post of Head Mistress as the same was found to be convenient by the said Society. She has also pointed out that after the order of suspension almost for three months she was not issued with any chargesheet. The Learned Counsel for the Respondent No.1 on instructions from the Secretary of the said Society states that the suspension allowance right from the date of 3 suspension till 30-11-2008 shall be released within two weeks from today and the entire amount of suspension allowance shall be borne by the Society. We direct that the suspension allowance payment shall be strictly as per the M. E. P. S. Rules. The Learned Counsel for the respondent no.1 further submits that the enquiry is still in progress. No reasons have been set out as to why the enquiry has been delayed beyond 120 days even from the date of chargesheet, leave alone any reasons attributable to the petitioner. Hence, there is no justification in continuing the petitioner under suspension any further. We, therefore, direct that Respondent no.1 Society shall withdraw the suspension order by 30-11-2008 and the petitioner will be allowed to report for duty from 1-12-2008 notwithstanding the fact that the enquiry under progress shall continue against her. The said enquiry shall 4 be completed as expeditiously as possible and in any case before 31st of December 2008. We have noted the assurance of the petitioner to co-operate to complete the enquiry within the stipulated period. Petition disposed of in terms of above directions. JUDGE JUDGE //Muley//.