The court emphasized the necessity of concluding disciplinary proceedings within a specified time, emphasizing the connection between suspension and misconduct allegations.

JUDGMENT Dated this the 2^nd day of February, 2026 The petitioner, who is working as Night Watchman under the Arayoor Service Co-operative Bank Limited, has filed this writ petition seeking the following reliefs:

(a) Issue a writ of certiorari or any other appropriate writ or order to quash Ext.P6 Memo and Ext.P13 suspension order as it is issued arbitrarily and exercising excess of power;

(b) Issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction directing the 2^nd and 3^rd respondents to consider Exts.P3 and P4 and pass orders directing the 7^th respondent to consider the period from 30.08.2025 to 17.10.2025, the date on which Ext.P13 suspension order was issued as duty and to pay the pay and allowances with all consequential benefits entitled to the petitioner;

(c) Issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction directing the 2^nd and 3^rd respondents to look into the facts which leads to issuance of Ext.P13 suspension order and direct to pass an order to reinstate into service and with all consequential benefits;

(d) Issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction directing the respondent No.7 to produce all the records leading to issuance of Ext.P13 suspension order.

2. Standing Counsel representing the respondents submitted that the petitioner has committed grave misconduct and disciplinary action is warranted. The suspension imposed on the petitioner is justified. The petitioner is not entitled to any relief as prayed for.

3. The arguments raised and pleadings in the writ petition would indicate that the petitioner entered into service on 04.06.2012 and was placed under suspension on 17.10.2025. The petitioner would allege that he is not being paid subsistence allowance and the enquiry is not completed.

The order of suspension is passed by an incompetent officer.

4. The petitioner therefore seeks to quash Ext.P6 Memo and Ext.P13 Suspension Order and to direct respondents 2 and 3 to consider Exts.P3 and P4 representation and pass orders directing the 7^th respondent to treat the period from 30.08.2025 to 17.10.2025 as duty.

5. Regularisation of period of suspension is a matter which can be considered only after conclusion of the disciplinary proceedings. The period from 30.08.2025 to 17.10.2025 is the period during which the petitioner was not permitted to sign the muster roll, contends the petitioner. That issue is intrinsically connected with the allegations being levelled against the petitioner.

6. In the afore circumstances, I am of the view that for bringing a quietus to the issues involved, the disciplinary proceedings are to be concluded.

The writ petition is therefore disposed of with the following directions:

(i) The respondents are directed to conclude the disciplinary proceedings contemplated against the petitioner within a period of three months.

(ii) If the disciplinary proceedings are not completed within the period of three months, the petitioner shall be permitted to resume duties revoking the suspension order.

(iii) On culmination of the disciplinary proceedings, the respondents shall necessarily consider the issue of regularisation of the period of suspension as well as regularisation of the period from 30.08.2025 to 17.10.2025 depending upon the outcome of the proceedings.

(iv) There will be a further direction to the respondents to pay subsistence allowance to the petitioner subject to the petitioner producing Non Employment Certificate.

Sd/-

N.NAGARESH JUDGE spk APPENDIX OF WP(C) NO. 40557 OF 2025 PETITIONER EXHIBITS Exhibit P1 TRUE COPY OF THE APPOINTMENT ORDER DATED 04/06/2012 ISSUED BY THE 6TH RESPONDENT Exhibit P2 TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED