JUDGMENT The petitioners are the employees of respondent No.1 They occupied the post of statisticians posted at Ujjain. The Secretary of the respondent No. 1 found that the petitioners were liable to be proceeded under the Departmental Rules. It was alleged that in place of Rs. 13,09,997.63 only Rs. 1,32,003.15 was shown in the record. The petitioners were, therefore, placed under suspension by order dated 31.1.94 (Annexure P/15). It was also directed that during the period of suspension, the head quarter will be at Bhopal. The petitioners felt aggrieved by the order of suspension departmental enquiry and change of head quarter from Ujjain to Bhopal. They have, therefore, jointly filed this petition seeking quashment of the order Annexure P/15. I have heard both the sides. The counsel for the petitioners submitted that the order is in violation of the principles of natural justice and was passed only on suspicion. He also submitted that there was no justification to change the head quarter from Ujjain to Bhopal. The counsel for the respondents opposed the petition and submitted that there is no valid ground for quashment of the Departmental Enquiry or Suspension. He, however, has no objection if the Head Quarter is retained at Ujjain and they are not shifted to Bhopal. On 15.2.94 the division Bench of this Court had directed that suspension shall continue but Head Quarter will be at Ujjain. In AIR 1985 SC 701 State of Orissa v. Shiva Prashad it is held that "An order of suspension passed against a Government servant pending disciplinary enquiry is neither one of dismissal nor of removal from service within Art. 311 of the Constitution. This position was clearly laid down by a Constitution Bench of this Court in Mohammad Ghouse v. State of Andhra 1957 SCR 414 ( AIR 1957 SC 246 ). It is unfortunate that this decision was not brought to the notice of the learned Judges of the High Court. Clause (1) of Art. 311 will get attracted only when a person who is a member of Civil Service of the Union or an All India Service or a Civil Service of a State or one who holds a civil post under the Union ora State is dismissed or 'removed' from service. Clause (1) of Art. 311 will get attracted only when a person who is a member of Civil Service of the Union or an All India Service or a Civil Service of a State or one who holds a civil post under the Union ora State is dismissed or 'removed' from service. The provisions of the said clause have no application whatever to a situation where a Government servant has been merely placed under suspension pending departmental enquiry since such action does not constitute either dismissal or removal from service. The High Court was, therefore, manifestly in error in quashing the order of suspension passed against the respondent on the ground that it was violative of clause (1) of Art. 311.01' the Constitution." In view of the aforesaid position, I am satisfied that there is no ground to quash the order of suspension and there is no ground to quash the order so far as holding of Departmental Enquiry is concerned. However, I am satisfied that respondents were not justified in changing the Head Quarter from Ujjain to Bhopal without any proper material in that behalf. It is not alleged that prospect of holding proper enquiry were bleak, while stationing the petition at their place posting at Ujjain. The counsel for the respondents very rightly did not oppose this limited prayer as regards Head Quarter. In the result, I allow this petition only in part and modify the order dated 31.1.94 (Annexure P/15) to the extent of change of head quarter and sustain the remaining part of the order. The Head Quarter shall continue to be at Ujjain. Respondent shall make an endeavour to conclude the Departmental Enquiry as expeditiously as possible. The petition, thus stands finally allowed in part in terms indicated above but without any order as to costs.