ORDER Feeling aggrieved by the order dated 2nd March, 2012 made by the learned single Judge in CWJC No. 3653 of 2012, the writ petitioner has preferred this Appeal under Clause 10 of the Letters Patent. 2. Learned counsel Mr. Shashi Anugrah Narain has appeared for the appellant. Mr. Narain has submitted that the appellant has been placed under suspension pending the disciplinary proceeding without the cause of action. Mr. Narain has submitted that by order dated 9th February, 2012 the appellant has been placed under suspension pending the disciplinary proceeding on the allegation that the appellant did not obey the order of transfer no. 1448 dated 20th December, 2010. He has submitted that if at all there were any order of transfer made against the appellant on 20th December, 2010 or on any other date, the same has not been served upon the appellant till the date. There was no occasion for the appellant to carry out the order of transfer. He has further submitted that the Office of the District Institute of Education and Training, Siwan, to which the appellant has allegedly been transferred, has also not received such order of transfer. 3. The learned single Judge has dismissed the writ petition on the ground that the appellant shall have the right to defence in the disciplinary proceeding. 4. We do agree that failure to join the place of transfer and posting is an act of insubordination. Such action of omission would expose a Government servant to disciplinary proceeding. However, every disciplinary proceeding shall not justify order of suspension pending enquiry. Ordinarily, a Government servant would be suspended from service pending the disciplinary proceeding in case there is a possibility of tampering with the evidence or there is a possibility of repetition of the same misconduct. 5. In the present case, the allegation is that the appellant did not carry out the order of transfer. In other words, the appellant has been alleged to have committed an act of insubordination. The order of transfer or its service is a matter of record. The same cannot be tampered with; nor there is a possibility of repeating the misconduct of the very nature. In our opinion, irrespective of the fact whether or not the order of transfer was served upon the appellant; the disciplinary proceeding contemplated against the appellant does not warrant order of suspension from service as well. 6. The same cannot be tampered with; nor there is a possibility of repeating the misconduct of the very nature. In our opinion, irrespective of the fact whether or not the order of transfer was served upon the appellant; the disciplinary proceeding contemplated against the appellant does not warrant order of suspension from service as well. 6. For the aforesaid reason, we allow this Appeal. The impugned order dated 2nd March, 2012 made by the learned single Judge in CWJC No. 3653 of 2012 is set aside. CWJC No. 3653 of 2012 is allowed. The impugned order of suspension dated 9th February, 2012 (Annexure-8 to the writ petition) is quashed and set aside insofar as the appellant is placed under suspension pending the disciplinary proceeding. 7. We clarify that this order shall not affect the decision of the State Government to initiate disciplinary proceeding against the appellant for the alleged act of insubordination of not carrying out the order of transfer no. 1448 dated 20th December, 2010. The appellant shall have liberty to put forth his defence. 8. In view of the above order, Interlocutory Application stands disposed of.