ORDER The petitioner is working as Tyre Mechanic in Rajampet Depot of A.P.S.R.T.C. He submitted a complaint to the Depot Manager on 4-1-2008, alleging that one Sri Y.U.M. Rao, a Painter in the same Depot had used filthy and abusive language against him due to union rivalry. A preliminary enquiry was caused by the Depot Manager and, ultimately, on 25-1-2008, the Regional Manager, i.e. the second respondent herein, placed the petitioner under suspension. On the same day, a charge sheet was also issue. This writ petition is filed against the order or suspension, dated 25-1-2008. 2. The petitioner states that it was he who submitted a written complaint to the Depot Manager alleging that another employee had used foul and filthy language against him and instead of taking action against the said employee, the second respondent has placed him under suspension. 3. On behalf of the respondents, a counter-affidavit is filed stating that the petitioner and an employee, by name Y.U.M. Rao, have created an ugly scene in the work-shop. It is stated that the union rivalry was exhibited by creating a very bad atmosphere and the work was stopped for one hour. It is stated that the departmental enquiry is in progress and no interference is warranted with the order of suspension. 4. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Standing Counsel for the respondents. 5. While admitting the writ petition, this Court passed an interim order on 5-2-2008, suspending the impugned order and leaving it open to the respondents to transfer the petitioner or the other employee, by name Y.U.M. Rao, to another place. 6. The record discloses that an ugly situation was created on account of the quarrel by the persons belonging to rival unions. It was the petitioner, who submitted a complaint to the Depot Manager, alleging that the other employee had abused him in filthy language. The Depot Manager, in turn, caused an enquiry through Assistant Manager (Traffic) of the Depot. The Assistant Manager recorded the statements of the various persons and submitted a report on 8-1-2008. Even according to this, the altercation started after the other employee, by name Y.U.M. Rao, spoke insulting words against the petitioner during pooja. Therefore, it prima facie emerges that the petitioner played the role, more of a complainant-victim than of an aggressor. The Assistant Manager recorded the statements of the various persons and submitted a report on 8-1-2008. Even according to this, the altercation started after the other employee, by name Y.U.M. Rao, spoke insulting words against the petitioner during pooja. Therefore, it prima facie emerges that the petitioner played the role, more of a complainant-victim than of an aggressor. The objectionable conduct, if at all, on the part of the petitioner appears to be as a response and reaction. These, however, are matters, which can be gone into in detail during the domestic enquiry. This Court finds that the suspension of the petitioner is not warranted in the facts and circumstances of the case. In case his presence in the Depot is likely to cause any hindrance in the enquiry, the respondents can transfer him to any other near place till the conclusion of the enquiry. 7. The writ petition is accordingly allowed and the impugned order is set aside. It is made clear that in case transfer becomes inevitable, both the employees, who were involved in the quarrel, must be transferred. There shall be no order as to costs.