IN THE HIGH COURT JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD TUESDAY, THE TWENTY SECOND DAY OF NOVEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND ELEVEN PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE G.CHANDRAIAH W.P. No.30660 of 2011 Between: G.Venkateswarlu … Petitioner and The Project Director, DWMA-cum- Joint Secretary SRDS, Kurnool, Kurnool District. … Respondent THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE G.CHANDRAIAH W.P. No.30660 of 2011 ORDER: This writ petition has been filed seeking for issuance of Writ of Mandamus declaring the impugned order dated 21.10.2010 of the respondent, suspending the petitioner, who is working as Technical Assistant under SRDS Scheme in Krishnagiri Mandal, Kurnool District, from the services, solely based on the social audit report which has no sanctity, as illegal, arbitrary and violation of Articles 14, 19 and 21 of the Constitution of India and consequently set aside the same. The case of the petitioner is that he was appointed as Technical Assistant in Krishnagiri Mandal under Society for Rural Development Services popularly known as SRDS in the month of April, 2007 and since then he has been working as such. While so, by proceedings dated 21.10.2010, the respondent suspended the petitioner on the ground of negligence in discharging his official duties and also on the ground of misappropriation of funds. Subsequently, he was issued a notice dated 03.11.2010 asking to submit his explanation. Accordingly, the petitioner submitted his explanation on 13.11.2010 denying all the allegations made against him. Since then, the respondent is not at all taking any steps in the matter. Therefore, the petitioner filed the present writ petition. The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that on the ground of false allegations, the petitioner was placed under suspension by proceedings dated 21.10.2010 and thereafter, issued a notice dated 03.11.2010 asking him to submit his explanation and in response to the same, the petitioner submitted his explanation on 13.11.2010 but thereafter, the respondent neither proceeding further in the matter nor taking any steps to reinstate the petitioner into service. Therefore, keeping the petitioner under suspension without any reason is bad and illegal. Therefore, the same is liable to be set aside. On the other hand, the learned standing counsel appearing for the respondent would submit that the impugned proceedings is relating to suspension of the petitioner on the ground of negligence in discharging his duties and misappropriation of funds and enquiry is still pending. Therefore, the suspension, pending enquiry, is not a punishment. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned standing counsel for the respondent and perused the material on record. The main grievance of the petitioner is that he was kept under suspension on the false allegation and the enquiry is pending. After a lapse of more than one year, the respondent neither proceeding with enquiry nor taking any steps to reinstate the petitioner into service. In that view of the matter, I deem it appropriate to dispose of this writ petition with the following direction. Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case and the submissions made by the learned counsel on either side, the respondent is directed to pass appropriate orders, in accordance with law, in respect of the proceedings dated 21.10.2010, whereby and whereunder the petitioner was kept under suspension, within a period of one month, from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. Further, he is also directed to consider the case of the petitioner for payment of subsistence allowance during the suspension period, in accordance with law. With the above direction, this writ petition is disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs. _________________________ JUSTICE G.CHANDRAIAH Date: 22.11.2011 Note: Furnish C.C. in a week. B/o. LSK