Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:117102 Court No. - 52 Case :- WRIT - A No. - 8080 of 2025 Petitioner :- Rajendra Singh Assistant Teacher Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Dharmendra Singh Counsel for Respondent :- Ashish Kumar Singh,C.S.C. Hon'ble Mrs. Manju Rani Chauhan,J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, Mr. Ashish Kumar Singh, learned counsel for respondent nos.2 & 3 and learned Standing Counsel for the State. 2. The writ petition has been filed with the prayer to quash the impugned suspension order dated 23.11.2009 as well as entire proceedings pending against the petitioner, and further prayer to direct the respondents to conclude the disciplinary proceedings strictly in accordance with law and pay subsistence allowance and other benefits up to date interest, within stipulated period. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner has been placed under suspension vide order dated 23.11.2009 and the enquiry has not been concluded till date. He further submits that as per settled position of law suspension cannot be continued for indefinite period. Therefore, the impugned suspension is illegal in the eyes of law and the same may be quashed. 4. Mr. Ashish Kumar Singh, learned counsel for the respondent nos.2 & 3, on the basis of instructions, submits that the petitioner had not appeared before the authorities concerned and avoided his participation in the enquiry since 18.02.2010. He further submits that the prayer of the petitioner is misconceived as he himself has stated that no disciplinary proceedings have been concluded till date, therefore, no occasion arises for quashing the disciplinary proceedings. There is delay in filing the petition, therefore, the petitioner is not entitled for any relief in view of settled position of law. 5. It is a trite law that the suspension is not a punishment. The Supreme Court in the case of Public Services Tribunal Bar Association Vs. State of U.P. and another, (2003) 4 SCC 104, has held that ordinarily the High Court should not stay suspension, transfer and termination orders. 6. The learned Counsel for the petitioner has failed to satisfy the Court that the suspension order has been passed in violation of any rule or is based on malafide. Accordingly, no interference is called for. 7. The writ petition is disposed of with a direction upon the second respondent-District Basic Education Officer, Agra, to complete the disciplinary proceedings/enquiry, after issuing fresh notice to the petitioner within three weeks from today, in accordance with law, expeditiously, preferably within a period of three months subject to cooperation of the petitioner. 8. There shall be no order as to costs. Order Date :- 18.7.2025 Rahul. Digitally signed by :- RAHUL GOSWAMI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad