0THE HON’BLE Ms. JUSTICE G.ROHINI WRIT PETITION NO.18284 OF 2009 Dated: 09.09.2009 Between: M. Ramakrishnudu … Petitioner And 1. The District Collector/District Project Co-ordinator, NREGS, DWMA, Kurnool District, Kurnool and another. … Respondents THE HON’BLE Ms. JUSTICE G.ROHINI WRIT PETITION NO.18284 OF 2009 ORDER: The petitioner herein is working as an Additional Programme Officer in connection with implementation of NREGS Programme in Veldurthy Village and Mandal, Kunrool District. On the basis of allegations of misappropriation of Government funds, the petitioner was placed under suspension pending enquiry by the 1st respondent vide proceedings dated 18.7.2008. Thereafter, a detailed enquiry was conducted into the allegations levelled against the petitioner as well as other staff members and a report was submitted by the Enquiry Officer on 28.1.2009 as under: “Finally, it is submitted that there is a clear and conclusion evidence that both mates (1) Sri Murali Krishnudu (2) Sri C.T.Nagaraju and Smt. G.Lakshmi Devi, Field Assistant have misappropriated the amount of Rs.47,933/- and the said people are only responsible persons for misappropriation and there is no evidence that the APO, and T.As are involve in misappropriation of Government Funds. … … … … .. … In view of the above circumstances, I request that necessary disciplinary action may be taken against Field Assistant Smt. G. Lakshmi Devi and mates (1) Sri Madhav Krishna (2) Sri C.T. Nagaraju and an amount of Rs.47,933/- needs to be recovered from the concerned persons.” The grievance of the petitioner in this writ petition is that in spite of the said report submitted by the Enquiry Officer long back on 28.1.2009, the 1st respondent failed to conclude the disciplinary proceedings and no order has been passed so far. It is also contended that as the Enquiry Officer found that the petitioner was not involved in misappropriation of Government Funds, the 1st respondent ought to have reinstated him into service. Heard both sides. Since the enquiry has already been completed and a report was submitted long back, the 1st respondent is bound to conclude disciplinary proceedings initiated against the petitioner, particularly keeping in view that he has been continuing under suspension from 8.7.2008 onwards. Accordingly, the Writ Petition is disposed of with a direction to the 1st respondent to pass appropriate orders taking into consideration the report dated 28.1.2009 submitted by the Enquiry Officer as expeditiously as possible preferably within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of this order failing which, the order of suspension pending enquiry dated 18.7.2008 shall stand set aside. No costs. ______________ G. ROHINI, J. Dt. 09.09.2009 gbs