HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE L.NARASIMHA REDDY WRIT PETITION No.31046 OF 2010 Between: D.P.Reddy …. Petitioner and The Works Manager, A.P.S.R.T.C., Zonal Work shop. …. Respondent This court made the following: HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE L.NARASIMHA REDDY WRIT PETITION No.31046 OF 2010 ORDER: The petitioner is working as a Leading Hand in the Zonal Work Shop, APSRTC, Karimnagar. The Works Manager-respondent herein, issued a charge sheet, dated 02.11.2010, alleging that the petitioner arranged for removal of spare parts from zonal workshop through a departmental goods transport vehicle belonging to Godavarikhani depot. The services of the sramik of that depot are said to have availed. On the same day the respondent passed an order and placed the petitioner under suspension. This petition is filed against the order of suspension. The petitioner contends that the sramik himself gave a statement admitting that he took the materials clandisantly by himself and that there is no concern of any other employee. It is also his case that the order of suspension is unwarranted. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Standing Counsel for APSRTC. It is true that a statement was recorded from the Sramik on 20.10.2010 and according to it he removed the articles by himself. After conducting the preliminary enquiry, the respondent placed the petitioner under suspension. It may be true that few days later, the Sramik was also placed under suspension. That by itself, does not relieve the petitioner of the charges framed against him. Inasmuch as the preliminary enquiry has already been held, the domestic proceedings can be concluded at the earliest. If there is any delay in this regard, the respondent can review that matter and consider the feasibility of revoking the suspension. Hence, the Writ Petition is disposed of directing the respondent to conclude the disciplinary proceedings within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. If for any reason, the proceedings cannot be concluded, the feasibility of revoking the order of suspension against the petitioner shall be considered. There shall be no order as to costs. ___________________ L.NARASIMHA REDDY, J December 13, 2010 lmv