- (1.) HEARD the parties.
(2.) THE appellant has preferred this appeal against the judgment and order dated 6.10 -2009 passed by learned Single Judge in W.P.(S) No. 3588 of 2009. The judgment reads as under: '' "The petitioner has been suspended by an order of the Government dated 25.7.2009 in contemplation of the departmental enquiry. The defence of the petitioner is that he has made payment pursuant to an order of the Chief Engineer. It was argued that the objection being taken by the respondents is that the order of the Chief Engineer was not countersigned by two other members. A perusal of the counter affidavit discloses that disciplinary proceedings have been decided to be initiated against the petitioner as well as against the Chief Engineer, at the level of the Government. Considering the nature of allegation made on the basis of which suspension order has been passed, it does not appear to be appropriate to interfere in the same under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. However, the disciplinary proceedings, in contemplation of which the petitioner has been suspended, shall be concluded as expeditiously as possible and preferably within three months of the date on which a certified copy of this order is presented before the respondent no. 4. This writ petition is disposed of with the aforesaid directions." Mr. Tewari, learned counsel appearing for the appellant assailed the impugned judgment on the ground that there is factual error in the judgment inasmuch as no action has been taken against the Chief Engineer. Learned counsel tried to take us to the merit of the case in order to show that no case is made out against the appellant.
(3.) IT is well settled that the order of suspension is not a punishment, therefore, this court refrains from interfering with such order.;