that the charge-sheet will be issued upon completion of the preliminary inquiry. Definitely, the procedure that has been followed by the Mahanagarpalika is flawed. It is based on the materials collected during the preliminary inquiry that the disciplinary authority has to decide whether to initiate disciplinary proceedings or not. Once materials are collected and a prima facie satisfaction is formed with regard to trustworthiness thereof for proceeding further, the disciplinary authority may while initiating disciplinary proceedings place the delinquent employee under suspension in order to ensure that he does not tinker with the evidence or otherwise influence the witnesses who could be cited as prosecution witnesses. We have no doubt in our mind that the Mahanagarpalika did not follow this well settled principle. It proceeded to place the petitioner under suspension even before the preliminary inquiry was completed and materials collected which could afford ground for initiating disciplinary proceedings. However, this by itself does not render the proceedings to be completely vitiated because ordering a suspension, either in contemplation of disciplinary proceedings or pending disciplinary proceedings, is interim in nature and does not amount to a penalty. It has to be seen in the facts of a given case whether a suspension is ordered mala fide without the disciplinary authority having any inclination to initiate disciplinary proceedings and with intent to keep the delinquent employee away from work without justifiable reason. In the present case, however, the allegations levelled against the petitioner prima facie appear to be serious, the charge-sheet has also been issued, albeit
