(1.) Leave to appeal granted.
(2.) The appeal is directed against the judgment and order of the High Court at Bombay whereby, on a Notice of Motion taken out by the respondent in a writ petition filed by him, the High Court revoked the order of suspension passed by the appellant against the respondent because the appellant had failed and neglected to initiate and complete disciplinary inquiry proceedings against the respondent for two years.
(3.) The respondent was employed by the appellant, which is a Society registered under the Societies Registration Act, as a Public Relations Officer. He was suspended, as aforementioned, on 21st September, 1990. The order of suspension issued by the Chairperson of the appellant recorded that the Central Bureau of Investigation was investigating a criminal case against the respondent and that he had been arrested in that connection. The respondent was placed under suspension and directed not to leave his headquarters at Bombay without obtaining prior permission. An order regarding subsistence allowance to be paid to the respondent, it was stated, would be issued separately. This order was issued on the same day and the respondent became entitled to draw subsistence allowance equivalent to half his pay plus admissible allowances. The respondent filed the writ petition in the High Court at Bombay on 22nd February, 1991 and prayed that the suspension order should be quashed and that he should be reinstated. Pending the disposal of the writ petition, the respondent asked that he be allowed to draw his full emoluments without deductions. The writ petition was admitted on 2nd April, 1991 in these terms :