JUDGMENT 1. The petitioner by means of this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution has challenged the order dated 6.2.87 by which he has been placed under suspension. This order has been passed by the Depot Manager and the contention raised on behalf of the petitioner is that the Depot Manager was not competent to pass this order. Sri S. K. Kalia, to whom notice of this petition was given,, has produced before us the resolution dated 20.12.86 of the Board of Directors U.P.S.R.T.C which, inter alia, provides as under : 2. A perusal of the relevant portion of the resolution, quoted above., indicates that in addition to the appointing authorities, Depot Manager as also the Assistant Regional Manager have also been vested with the power to suspend an employee who could be appointed by the Regional Manager. 3. It is not disputed that the appointing authority of the petitioner, who is a Conductor, is the Regional Manager. In view of the resolution dated 20.12.86 adopted by the Board of Directors, U.P.S.R.T.C., the petitioner can be validly suspended by the Depot Manager. 4. It was then urged that the impugned order of suspension is arbitrary. This also is devoid of merit as the nature of the charges has been indicated in the suspension order which also recites that the petitioner has been placed under suspension in contemplation of the disciplinary proceedings in respect of the charges enumerated therein. 5. The petition, in our opinion, lacks merit and is dismissed summarily. (Petition dismissed)