Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:90822 Court No. - 4 Case :- WRIT - A No. - 3938 of 2025 Petitioner :- Ravendra Kumar Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Shantanu Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C. Hon'ble Ajit Kumar,J. Heard Sri Shantanu, learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Standing Counsel for the State respondents. By means of this petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution, petitioner has questioned the order of suspension dated 9th July, 2024 on the ground that vague and flimsy charges were leveled placing the petitioner under suspension and since there is no iota of evidence the department itself did not proceed further to institute the disciplinary proceedings by issuing a chargesheet. It is for this reason that learned Standing Counsel was directed to obtain instructions in the matter. Learned Standing Counsel has obtained instructions, which are taken on record and a copy whereof is also supplied to learned counsel for the petitioner. As per the instructions, chargesheet has come to be approved by the competent authority only on 4th April, 2025 and served upon the petitioner on 7th April, 2025. Thus, it is clearly reflected that that the respondent disciplinary authority has suddenly acted in the matter to finalize the chargesheet and serve upon the petitioner after order was passed by this Court on 1st April, 2025. In such circumstances, therefore, if the petitioner was placed under suspension on 9th July, 2024, I do not find any justification for the respondent – disciplinary authority to continue him under suspension without instituting the inquiry. An order passed in contemplation of inquiry means that inquiry shall be instituted within a reasonable period of time. The maximum reasonable period of time for departmental inquiry for issuance of chargesheet should be 90 days or three months and not waiting for an order of High Court. Thus, I find that there to be no reason available for the respondents to place the petitioner under suspension and the petitioner has been definitely placed under suspension for flimsy grounds and vague charges. In the circumstances, therefore, the order of suspension cannot be sustained. The writ petition succeeds and is allowed. The order of suspension dated 9th July, 2024 is hereby quashed. However, it is clarified that allowing this petition and quashing of the order of suspension would not deter the respondent authorities from concluding the disciplinary authorities pursuant to the chargesheet dated 4th April, 2025 and served upon the petitioner on 7th April, 2025. Petitioner is also directed to cooperate in the inquiry. The claim for salary for the period the petitioner has remained under suspension shall depend upon the final outcome of this petition. Order Date :- 27.5.2025 Atmesh Digitally signed by :- ATMESH KESARI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad