THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE K.C.BHANU WRIT PETITION No. 16871 OF 2011 ORDER: 1. This Writ Petition is filed seeking to declare the action of the respondent in suspending the petitioner from service vide proceedings dated 09.05.2011 and its consequential proceedings dated 16.05.2011 without issuing any notice to the petitioner, without conducting enquiry and without following any procedure contemplated under law as illegal and arbitrary, and set aside the same, and consequently direct the respondent to reinstate the petitioner into service with all consequential benefits. 2. The brief facts that are necessary for disposal of the Writ Petition may be stated as follows. The petitioner was working as Senior Technician in respondent company, a Government of India Enterprise. Basing on the letter dated 9.5.2011 addressed by the Superintendent of Police, Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI), the respondent suspended him. It is stated in the said proceedings that one B.P.Singh, Technician, Midhani lodged complaint to CBI on 29.4.2011 stating that one J.Viswesara Rao, Deputy General Manager, who is legal advisor of the company, demanded a bribe of Rs.3,00,000/- for favourable disposal of his long pending disciplinary file, and asked him to pay 1/3rd thereof or atleast Rs.50,000/- as first instalment to his trusted aides i.e. one K.L.Nageswara Rao and the petitioner at the earliest, and that the former met him and asked the amount on or before 29.4.2011 outside the gate of Midhani; as he did not want to pay the amount, he requested the CBI to take action as per law; that, the said complaint was registered as a case on 29.4.2011, and in a trap on 29.4.2011, the said K.L.Nageswara Rao and the petitioner were caught red-handed while accepting bribe of Rs.10,000/-. The respondent, on false and baseless allegations, placed the petitioner under suspension without conducting nay enquiry with regard to the said allegations, or that he did not even issue any show-cause notice to the petitioner before suspending him from service. But, the respondent has not taken any action against the said Deputy General Manager. Hence, the Writ Petition. 3. The learned counsel for the petitioner contended that the petitioner is nothing to do with the alleged trap and it is the Deputy General Manager, who demanded the alleged bribe from said B.P.Singh and therefore the petitioner is nothing to do with the said demand and acceptance, and hence, he prays to set aside the impugned order. 4. Suspension pending enquiry is governed by the Rules. It is not in dispute that an employee can be suspended pending disciplinary enquiry or in contemplation of enquiry. In such circumstances, the question of giving any prior notice to the employees does not arise. If the misconduct alleged is grave and severe, the disciplinary authority can place an employee under suspension. Ordinarily, this court would not interfere with the suspension pending enquiry, unless mala fides are attributed to the disciplinary authority. The allegation against the petitioner is that he demanded and accepted bribe of Rs.10,000/- from one B.P.Singh, a Technician in respondent company, and therefore basing on the information furnished by CBI, he was placed under suspension. No mala fides are attributed. It is not a case where without there being any material, the petitioner was placed under suspension. The suspension order dated 09.05.2011 coupled with the consequential order dated 16.5.2011 would prima facie go to show that the petitioner allegedly demanded and accepted bribe of Rs.10,000/- from the said B.P.Singh. Therefore, there are no grounds to interfere with the same. 5. The Writ Petition is devoid of merit and is, accordingly, dismissed at the stage of admission. No costs. --------------------- (K.C.Bhanu, J.) 20.06.2011 DRK THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE K.C.BHANU WRIT PETITION No. 16871 OF 2011 20.06.2011