IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD PRESENT THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE K.C.BHANU W.P.No.18606 OF 2011 Date:05.07. 2011 Between:- M.Mohan .. Petitioner And The Government of A.P., rep.by its Principal Secretary, Panchayat Raj and Rural Development Department, Hyderabad and others. .. Respondents THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE K.C.BHANU W.P.No.18606 OF 2011 ORDER: This writ petition has been filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, seeking to issue a writ of Mandamus declaring the action of respondent No.3 in placing the petitioner under suspension by Proceedings No.D12/09/SA.TA/2011, dated 05.03.2011, as illegal and arbitrary and consequently, to set aside the same. 2. The petitioner has been appointed as Field Assistant under the National Rural Employment Guarantee Scheme on contract basis. He has to maintain Attendance Register for the workers and record the earth work excavation of Peddamarror Gram Panchayat. While he was performing as such, he was placed under suspension by respondent No.3 vide the impugned order on the allegation of financial irregularities in the third round of social audit, which was held from 05.01.2011 to 12.01.2011, and misappropriation of funds to an amount of Rs.1,22,155/- and Rs.2,25,875/- in APD and QC enquiry and directed to submit his explanation within 15 days. He submitted his explanation on 12.03.2011. The respondents, without taking any steps on the explanation, dated 12.03.2011, and without reinstating him into service, contemplating to fill up the said post with others. Hence, the writ petition. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner contended that the petitioner has not committed any illegality so as to place him under suspension and hence, he prays to allow the writ petition. 4. Learned counsel appearing for the respondents contended that the petitioner is only a contract employee and suspension of the petitioner pending enquiry is sustainable. 5. Ordinarily, this Court would not interfere with the order of suspension pending enquiry or contemplation of enquiry. It is for the disciplinary authority to take appropriate decision. Unless mala fides are attributed to the person, who placed the petitioner under suspension, or the person, who passed the impugned order, lacks jurisdiction, this Court would not interfere with the same. The case of the petitioner does not fall under anyone of the two categories as stated above. Therefore, there are no grounds to set aside the impugned order. However, since the impugned order has been passed on 05.03.2011, respondent No.3 shall take appropriate decision on the enquiry report, if any submitted, within a period of four (4) weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order and thereafter, communicate the same to the petitioner. 6. With the above direction, this writ petition is disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs. ______________________ JUSTICE K.C.BHANU 05th July, 2011. AMD THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE K.C.BHANU W.P.No.18606 OF 2011 Date:05.07.2011 AMD