JUDGMENT By the Court.—Heard learned Counsel for the appellant and learned Standing Counsel. 2. This is an appeal against an order dated 1.8.2006 passed by the Hon’ble Single Judge disposing of the writ petition directing for conclusion of the inquiry within three months from the date of submission of a certified copy of the order. 3. The appellant was under suspension on 20.12.2005 on the basis of a news item telecast by news channel showing the appellant having accepting a bribe. Learned Counsel for the appellant submits that the amount which he received was, in fact, an amount of payment of house tax. He submits that suspension was unjustified. 4. We have considered the submissions and perused the record. The submissions which are being raised before us can at best be defence of the appellant, and can be gone into and examined in the inquiry. We do not find any error in the suspension of the appellant. Learned Single Judge has rightly directed for conclusion of the inquiry within three months. 5. We only observe that in any event, if the inquiry is not completed within the time as directed by the first Court, it is open for the appellant to move an application before the competent authority for revocation of his suspension order which may be considered and disposed of in accordance with law. Needless to say that the appellant will be entitled for suspension allowance during the suspension period in accordance with law. Subject to above observations, the appeal is dismissed. Appeal Dismissed. ———