IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Civil Writ Petition No.5470 of 2008 (O&M) Date of Decision : February 01, 2010. Parveen Kumar .....Petitioner versus State of Punjab and others .....Respondents CORAM : HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE SURYA KANT. Present : Mr.Simranjeet Singh, Advocate, for Mr.Arun Bansal, Advocate, for the petitioner. -.- 1. Whether Reporters of Local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? 2. To be referred to the Reporters or not? 3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest? --- ORDER Surya Kant, J. (Oral) The petitioner seeks quashing of the suspension order dated 28.3.2008 (Annexure P-3) passed by the Deputy Commissioner-cum- Collector, Amritsar. While issuing notice of motion, a Division Bench of this Court had stayed the operation of the afore-mentioned order on April 2, 2008. Thereafter, the respondent-authorities were directed to explain the delay caused in the initiation of disciplinary proceedings, if any. Counter-reply and the additional affidavit have been filed by C.W.P.No .5470 of 2008 (O&M) 2 the respondents. It appears that two separate charge-sheets have been served upon the petitioner. However, it is not the case of the respondents that continuation of the petitioner on duty, is causing any obstruction in ongoing departmental enquiries. In these circumstances when the suspension order has already been stayed from last about two years, there is no occasion to go into the issue of alleged malafide exercise of power behind placement of the petitioner under suspension. Suffice it to observe that while permitting the petitioner shall continue on duty, the pending departmental proceedings can also be concluded without any hindrance and in accordance with law. The writ petition is accordingly allowed; the impugned suspension order dated 28.3.2008 (Annexure P-3) is set-aside with liberty to the official respondents to continue and conclude the departmental enquiries in accordance with law. Dasti. 01-02-2010 (SURYA KANT) Mohinder JUDGE