THE HON’BLE Ms. JUSTICE G. ROHINI WRIT PETITION No.19509 OF 2009 Dated: 16.09.2009 Between: A. Padmanabha Reddy .. Petitioner And 1. The Managing Director, AP State Housing Corpn. Ltd., Urdugalli, Himayatnagar, Hyderabad and another. .. Respondents THE HON’BLE Ms. JUSTICE G. ROHINI WRIT PETITION No.19509 OF 2009 ORDER : The petitioner herein is working as Mandal In-charge (MIC) in the A.P. State Housing Corporation Limited at Ramasamudram, Chittoor District. This writ petition is filed aggrieved by the order of the 2nd respondent dated 22.8.2009 placing him under suspension pending enquiry into the alleged irregularities in releasing payments for the material and collecting money from the beneficiaries. At the outset, it is to be noticed that the authority of the 2nd respondent to pass the impugned order of suspension is not under dispute. The only contention raised by the petitioner is that all the allegations made in the impugned order being absolutely false and without any basis, the impugned order of suspension is unwarranted and unjustified. While claiming that the impugned order is based upon a mere news item published in Surya Newspaper on 12.7.2009 and no other complaint is there from any of the beneficiaries, it is further contended that initiation of disciplinary proceedings itself is not warranted and at any rate placing the petitioner under suspension is arbitrary and illegal. It is also contended that the petitioner is not responsible in any way for the alleged lapses and the fact that no charge-sheet has been issued till today shows that the allegations are baseless and unfounded. Sri Mohan Rami Reddy, the learned Standing Counsel appearing for the respondent Corporation under instructions stated that the charge-sheet would be issued within a week and the enquiry would be conducted in accordance with law. Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case and particularly since there is no dispute about the competency of the 2nd respondent, I am not inclined to interfere with the impugned order of suspension pending enquiry. The correctness of the allegations is a matter for enquiry by the 2nd respondent and it is neither possible nor necessary for this Court to express any opinion. Hence the interference by this Court at this stage is not warranted on any ground whatsoever. Instead I deem it appropriate to dispose of the writ petition with a direction to the respondents to complete the enquiry following due process of law as expeditiously as possible preferably within a period of eight (8) weeks from the date of receipt of this order failing which the impugned order of suspension shall stand set aside. No costs. Writ Petition is accordingly disposed of. No costs. ______________ G. ROHINI, J. Dt. 16.09.2009 gbs