IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) THURSDAY, THE TWENTYETH DAY OF AUGUST TWO THOUSAND AND NINE PRESENT THE HON'BLE MS JUSTICE G.ROHINI WRIT PETITION NO : 13079 of 2008 Between: B.Subramanyam, Duvvur Mandal, Kadapa District. ..... PETITIONER AND The District Collector/Executive Director, A.P.State Housing Corporation Ltd., Kadapa, Kadapa District. .....RESPONDENT The Court made the following : THE HON'BLE MS JUSTICE G.ROHINI WRIT PETITION No.13079 of 2008 ORDER: This writ petition is filed seeking a declaration that the action of the respondent in suspending the petitioner vide proceedings dated 13.6.2008, as arbitrary and illegal. While issuing Rule nisi, this Court in WPMP No.16895 of 2008 granted interim suspension of the impugned order holding as under:- “Normally, this Court would not interfere with the orders of suspension, pending enquiry. This case, however, presents certain extraordinary circumstances. A charge memo, dated 12.03.2008, was served upon the petitioner, wherein four charges were framed. For instance, one of the charges was that the petitioner issued cement to the beneficiaries through manually generated orders, instead of computer generated orders. In his reply, dated 20.03.2008, the petitioner stated that he was specifically instructed by the Joint Collector to release cement to the beneficiaries through manual orders, without waiting to enter the same in the online data. No further steps were taken after receiving the explanation, be it, appointment of Enquiry Officer, or dropping the charges. Even while the explanation submitted by the petitioner is under consideration, the impugned order, dated 13.06.2008, is issued. The only aggravating circumstances, if any, is the darna and rasta roko, said to have been resorted to by certain organizations, to record their protest, against the delayed disbursement of the amounts and material. This Court prima facie finds that the petitioner was sandwiched between the one set of authorities, who wanted to release all material and amounts by deviating from the on line procedure, and another set of authorities, who insisted on adherence to the procedure, at any cost. The order of suspension cannot, prima facie, be suspended either on facts, or in law. Accordingly, there shall be interim suspension of the impugned order.” It is not in dispute that in compliance with the said order, the petitioner has been reinstated into service and he is now continued in service. In view of the above said facts and circumstances, the learned counsel for the respondent states that no further enquiry is necessary in this writ petition and the respondent may be permitted to proceed with the enquiry. Accordingly, the impugned order dated 24.6.2008 is hereby set aside and the writ petition is disposed of leaving it open to the respondent to proceed with the enquiry following due process of law. No costs. _______________ Justice G.Rohini Date:20.08.2009 mrb