ORDER The petitioner is working as a Security Guard in Gajuwaka Depot of A.P.S.R.T.C. On 17-3-2008, the Vigilance and Security Officer, A.P.S.R.T.C., Vizianagaram Zone, 2nd respondent herein issued an order of suspension and a charge sheet against the petitioner. In the charge sheet, it was mentioned that on 14-2-2008, the petitioner adduced false evidence against the Depot Manager, Gajuwaka, 3rd respondent herein, and that he misbehaved, by pointing out his left hand finger to him. On the basis of these allegations, the petitioner was placed under suspension, pending enquiry. The same is challenged in this writ petition. 2. Heard S.M. Subhani, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri K. Madhava Reddy, learned Standing Court for the respondents. 3. It is only in rare cases, that this Court would interfere with the orders of suspension. Where, however, the contents of an order of suspension, even if taken at face value, do not constitute any serious misconduct, the question as to whether the suspension is warranted can certainly be considered. 4. A perusal of the events mentioned in the order of suspension as well as the charge sheet disclose that the petitioner was not at all part of the group, that was having discussion in the chambers of the depot Manager. On the other hand, he was called by the Depot Manager, almost as a witness, in the context of what was stated by the Security Head Guard vis-a-vis the allegation made by the leaders of the union. The petitioner stated certain things, which, according to him, were relevant, that too, on being asked. The mere fact that the facts stated by the petitioner were not acceptable to one of the groups or the Management, cannot, prima facie, be treated as misconduct. 5. Another allegation is that the petitioner had pointed out his left hand finger to the Depot Manager. Barring this, nothing objectionable was mentioned. It needs to be noted that neither any allegations as to deficiency in discharge of duty or any acts of misconduct in the ordinary parlance, were made against the petitioner. In case, the respondents feel that the continuance of the petitioner at Gajuwaka Depot is not desirable, till the matter is enquired into, he can be shifted to another Depot. 6. For the foregoing reasons, the writ is allowed and the impugned order is set aside. There shall be no order as to costs.