The Hon’ble Sri Justice R.Subhash Reddy Writ Petition No.3643 of 2010 Order: The petitioner, who was working as an Assistant Engineer in the respondents- A.P.State Housing Corporation Limited, has filed this Writ Petition questioning the validity of order, dated 7th October, 2009, in proceedings No.VIG(4)/1300/NZB/2009-2, passed by respondent No.1, in exercise of his powers under sub-rule (1) of Rule 8 of the Andhra Pradesh Civil Services (CCA) Rules, 1991 read with A.P.State Housing Corporation Limited Conduct Rules, 1997. By the aforesaid order, the petitioner was placed under suspension on the ground that while working as an Assistant Engineer (Housing) at Morthad Mandal, Nizamabad District, he made irregular payments to an extent of Rs.44,64,900/- to the beneficiaries in Kothapally Village, Kotagiri Mandal, Nizamabad District. It is contended by learned Counsel for the petitioner that as per the circular instructions issued by the A.P.State Housing Corporation Limited vide Circulars, dated 9th October, 2007 and 13th October, 2008, the process of disbursements is made only after thorough verification by the MHO and under his Control and the Assistant Engineer (Housing) is responsible only to the extent of ensuring that there is no delay in payment of bills to the beneficiaries. The learned Counsel further submitted that in view of the same, the petitioner, who held the post of Assistant Engineer during the relevant period, cannot be held responsible for the irregularities, if any, committed in payments made to the beneficiaries. Ultimately, it is submitted that the impugned order was passed without application of mind and contrary to the instructions issued by the Corporation in the abovesaid Circulars. Though there are certain instructions issued by the respondent-Corporation to certify the eligible beneficiaries, the question as to who is liable for the alleged irregular payments made to the beneficiaries cannot be gone into in this Writ Petition. Inasmuch as the disciplinary proceedings are not yet concluded, the correctness or otherwise of the allegations made against the petitioner also cannot be gone into by this Court at this stage. Mere issuance of the Circular Instructions by the respondents does not entitle the petitioner for grant of relief that the impugned order was passed contrary thereto. For the aforesaid reasons, I do not find any merit in this Writ Petition, warranting interference of this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. Inasmuch as it is stated that the petitioner is placed under suspension from 7th October, 2009 and nearly five months period has already lapsed, I deem it appropriate to direct the respondents- authorities to complete the enquiry in the disciplinary proceedings as expeditiously as possible, preferably within a period of four months from today. Subject to the above direction, the Writ Petition is disposed of. No order as to costs. _________________ R.Subhash Reddy, J Date: 25th March, 2010 lur