S. B. SINHA, C. J. ( 1 ) THIS appeal is directed against an order passed by a learned single Judge of this Court whereby and whereunder the writ petition filed by the respondent herein was disposed of with the following directions:"taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case, I direct the respondent to complete the disciplinary enquiry against the petitioner within a period of three months from the date of receipt of this order failing which the petitioner shall be re-instated into service or he be paid full salary. " ( 2 ) BEFORE the learned single Judge, the order dated 27-10-1999 placing the respondent-petitioner who is working as additional Assistant Engineer, A. P. TRANSCO under suspension pending conclusion of the disciplinary proceedings/ termination of all proceedings relating to the criminal charge, was in question. The said order of suspension reads thus:"whereas it has come to the notice of the undersigned who is the competent authority alleging that Sri P. Sambasiva rao, Additional Assistant Engineer/ distribution-IV/guntur of Operation circle, Guntur was trapped by Anti-Corruption bureau on 30-9-1999 when he demanded a bribe amount of Rs. 1400/ -. 2. And whereas a case has been registered by the ACB (Anti-Corruption bureau) in Cr. No. 29/acb-VJA of 1999, under Section 7 of the prevention of corruption Act, 1988. 3. And whereas it is considered that his continuance in office will prejudice the investigation. 4. And whereas the undersigned after careful consideration of the available material and having due regard to the circumstances of the case is satisfied that the criminal charge under investigation is connected with his official position as ap TRANSCO employee and involved in moral turpitude and therefore considers it necessary to place Sri P. Sambasiva rao, Additional Assistant Engineer/ distribution-IV/guntur of Operation circle, Guntur under suspension. 5. Now, therefore, in exercise of the powers conferred by Regulation 11 of A. P. TRANSCO (Erstwhile APSEB) employees Discipline and Appeal regulations, the undersigned places the said Sri P. Sambasiva Rao, Additional, assistant Engineer/distribution-IV section/guntur of Operation Circle, guntur under suspension from the date of communication of this order and he shall continue to be under suspension until the conclusion of the disciplinary proceedings/termination of all proceedings relating to the criminal charge. 6. 6. It is further ordered that during the period of this order remains in force, the headquarters of Sri P. Sambasiva Rao, additional Assistant Engineer/electrical, shall be Guntur and the said Sri P. Sambasiva Rao, Additional Assistant engineer/electrical shall not leave the headquarters without obtaining the prior permission of the undersigned. 7. It is further ordered that during the period of suspension, Sri P. Sambasiva Rao, Additional Assistant engineer/distribution-IV Section/guntur of Operation Circle, Guntur shall be paid subsistence allowance equivalent to the leave salary on half pay leave. The DA and other compensatory allowances shall be paid along with subsistence allowance. The quantum of subsistence allowance will be reviewed and revised in terms of regulation 456 of A. P. TRANSCO (Erstwhile APSEB) Service Regulations part-I after three months. Pending review, he shall continue to draw the subsistence allowance now sanctioned. Chief Engineer, Electricity, vijayawada Zone, Vijayawada. " ( 3 ) ADMITTEDLY, the respondent herein is governed by the Andhra Pradesh State electricity Board Employees Discipline and appeal Regulations. Regulation 11 thereof provides for suspension. Clause (a) of regulation 11 reads thus:" (A) A member of a class of service may be placed under suspension from service, where:- (i) an enquiry into grave charges against him is contemplated, or is pending, or (ii) a complaint against him of any criminal offence is under investigation or trial and if such suspension is necessary in the Board s interest: provided that where a member of a service has been suspended by an authority other than the Board and the investigation has not been completed and the action proposed to be taken in regard to him has not been completed within a period of six months from the date of suspension, the fact shall be reported to the Board for passing such orders as it may deem fit. " ( 4 ) IN the instant case, admittedly, an order of suspension was passed under regulation 11 of the above regulations. Rule 13 (d) of the regulations provide for an appeal against an order of suspension ordered under Regulation 11. Regulation 11 is analogous to Rule 8 of the A. P Civil services (Classification, Control and Appeal) rules, 1991. " ( 4 ) IN the instant case, admittedly, an order of suspension was passed under regulation 11 of the above regulations. Rule 13 (d) of the regulations provide for an appeal against an order of suspension ordered under Regulation 11. Regulation 11 is analogous to Rule 8 of the A. P Civil services (Classification, Control and Appeal) rules, 1991. Having regard to the nature of allegations made against the respondent as also the order of suspension impugned in the writ application, there cannot be any doubt whatsoever that the same had not only been passed in accordance with the extant regulations but also with due application of mind. ( 5 ) IN the writ petition, the ACB which has registered a criminal case against the respondent had not been impleaded as a party. The appellants herein cannot be said to have any control over the ACB which is conducting enquiry or investigation into the criminal charge. This Court, in exercise of its jurisdiction under Article 226 of the constitution, can interfere with an order of suspension if the same is per se illegal or has been passed without application of mind and/or without taking into consideration all relevant facts and based on consideration of irrelevant and extraneous matters. On a consideration of the material on record, we are of the view that the order of suspension as such does not suffer from any legal infirmity. However, there cannot be any doubt whatsoever that normally an employee should not be kept under suspension for undue long time. ( 6 ) IN that view of the matter, while setting aside the order of the learned single Judge, we direct that periodical review of the suspension be made by the appellants as required under the regulations and orders be passed and, in the event, the respondent-writ petitioner is aggrieved by any such order, he may a prefer an appeal there against. However, having regard to the fact that the respondent has been kept under suspension for a long time, we would request the ACB authorities to complete the investigation, if not already completed, as expeditiously as possible, preferably, within a period of three months from the date of communication of a copy of this order. ( 7 ) THE writ appeal is allowed subject to the aforementioned directions. There shall be no order as to costs.