( 1 ) THE petitioner has been suspended by an order dated 13. 6. 1997, being Annexure T to the writ petition. Learned counsel for the petitioner assails the said order on the ground that it does not appear from the said order that the inquiry is contemplated. Under rule 49a the suspension order can be issued only when inquiry is contemplated or is pending. Therefore, according to him the order of suspension is bad and is liable to be quashed. He also contends that the order of suspension has been passed malafide.

( 2 ) LEARNED Additional Chief Standing Counsel Sri D. R. Chaudhary, contends that the very expression used presupposes that the inquiry is contemplated though in so many words, it has not been specified. The absence of the words that inquiry is contemplated would not render the order void. According to him this is purely technical defect which should not be given much importance. It is the substance of the order which is to be looked into and decided as to whether the inquiry is contemplated or not.

( 3 ) AFTER perusal of the order, it appears that on the basis of certain charges, the petitioner has been suspended with immediate effect. A plain reading of t