THE HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE T.MEENA KUMARI and THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE G.V.SEETHAPATY WRIT PETITION No :19714 of 2010 ORAL JUDGMENT: (Per Hon’ble Smt. Justice T. Meena Kumari) In this writ petition, the petitioner seeks to assail the order dated 6.8.2010 of the A.P. Administrative Tribunal, Hyderabad made in O.A. No. 3940 of 2007, whereby and whereunder the Tribunal dismissed the O.A. filed by the petitioner. The facts in brief are that the petitioner who was working as Junior Assistant in the Office of Commercial Taxes, Vizianagaram was placed under suspension on the ground that he was indulged in a case of trap conducted by the A.C.B., Vizanagaram on 27.11.2006. According to the petitioner, on the date of the alleged trap, he was not at all present in the office as he was entrusted with the bank and treasury duty. Petitioner further claimed that even the report of the A.C.B. did not disclose that the applicant was present when the alleged trap was conducted and he was arrested on 12.12.2006. He further stated that he never demanded any illegal gratification nor accepted the same. However the 2nd respondent, without taking these factors into consideration had placed the petitioner under suspension through proceedings dated 29.11.2006. Hence, he filed the aforementioned O.A. before the Tribunal assailing the order of the 2nd respondent. On 16.7.2007, the Tribunal, initially, while ordering notice before admission, has granted interim order suspending the proceedings dated 29.11.2006. While opposing the O.A., the respondents filed a counter affidavit stating that on 27.11.2006, a radio message was received from the Inspector of Police, A.C.B., Vizinagaram to the effect that one Mr. Asif Ahmed, S/o. M.S. Fareed, a retired Medical Officer of Vizianagaram made a complaint against the petitioner alleging that when he went to the Commercial Tax Office and met the petitioner for returning of N.S.C. bond, which was submitted by his father, the petitioner demanded bribe amount of Rs.1,000/- and also told him either to pay the same to the petitioner or to the Attender, the second accused. The complainant, therefore, approached the A.C.B. It is stated that on 27.11.2006, the A.C.B. trapped the second accused and arrested him. However, the petitioner could not be arrested as he absconded on seeing the A.C.B. officials. Subsequently, the petitioner was arrested and he was placed under suspension. The Tribunal, having heard the learned counsel for the parties and having perused the material on record, while vacating the interim suspension granted by it earlier, dismissed the O.A. Hence the present writ petition. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that as the petitioner was entrusted with treasury duty, he was not at all present when the alleged trap was held and as nothing was recovered from him, the respondents are not justified in placing him under suspension. He further stated that the petitioner was promoted as Senior Assistant on 15.7.2010 and has been working as such till date. Since the disciplinary as well as criminal proceedings initiated against him are still pending and by virtue of the orders of the Tribunal dismissing the O.A., he would suffer hardship and irreparable loss. He therefore, prayed that the writ petition be allowed and the impugned order of the Tribunal be set aside. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and perused the impugned order of the Tribunal. In the instant case, the competent authority having felt that there was prima facie material to show that the petitioner had indulged in such misconduct, had placed him under suspension, through proceedings dated 29.11.2006 till conclusion of the disciplinary proceedings. Admittedly, the petitioner was placed under suspension pending enquiry. The petitioner did not place any material either before the Tribunal or before this Court to show that the competent authority lacks the power to place him under suspension, in the absence of which, the Tribunal rightly dismissed the O.A. We, therefore do not find any illegality or irregularity in the order of the Tribunal warranting interference. The writ petition fails and it is accordingly dismissed. No costs. ___________________ T.MEENA KUMARI,J Date: 5th October, 2010 ____________________ G.V. SEETHAPATHY,J pnb