ORDER : 1. This writ petition is directed against the order of suspension passed by respondent No.1 by which the petitioner has been placed under suspension in exercise of jurisdiction under Rule 9 of the Chhattisgarh Civil Services (Classification, Control and Appeal) Rules, 1966 (for short, ‘the Rules of 1966’). 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the impugned order is wholly arbitrary, illegal and is liable to be set aside as under Rule 9 of the Rules of 1966, a Government servant can be placed under suspension where a disciplinary proceeding against him is contemplated or is pending under Rule 9(1)(a), or where a case against him in respect of any criminal offence is under investigation, inquiry or trial under Rule 9(1)(b). But in the instant case, neither there is disciplinary proceeding contemplated nor is pending against the petitioner and it is also not the case that any criminal offence is under investigation, inquiry or trial against the petitioner, therefore, the suspension is bad. He would rely upon the decision of the Supreme Court in the matter of Radha Krishan Industries v. State of Himachal Pradesh and others, (2021) 6 SCC 771 (paragraph 24) to buttress his submission. 3. I have heard learned counsel for the petitioner on the question of admission and gone through the record with utmost circumspection. 4. Rule 9(1)(a) of the Rules of 1966 provides that a Government servant can be placed under suspension where a disciplinary proceeding against him is contemplated or is pending. 5. According to the Concise Oxford English Dictionary (Eleventh Edition), “contemplate” means look at thoughtfully, think about, think profoundly and at length, and have as a probable intention. Thus, in the instant case, “contemplation” means it is likely to be initiated or under consideration. 6. A careful perusal of the impugned order would show that the State Government has conducted preliminary enquiry against the petitioner and on that basis, the petitioner has been placed under suspension in exercise of Rule 9(1)(a) of the Rules of 1966. Once preliminary enquiry has been conducted and some material has found against the Government servant to be placed under suspension, it can be said that disciplinary proceeding under Rule 9(1) of the Rules of 1966 is contemplated against him and he can be placed under suspension. Once preliminary enquiry has been conducted and some material has found against the Government servant to be placed under suspension, it can be said that disciplinary proceeding under Rule 9(1) of the Rules of 1966 is contemplated against him and he can be placed under suspension. As such, I am of considered opinion that the impugned order of suspension is in contemplation of the disciplinary proceeding against the petitioner and therefore the submission made in this behalf is liable to be rejected and is hereby rejected. 7. Since the petitioner’s contention has been considered on merits, therefore, the decision relied upon by learned counsel for the petitioner – Radha Krishan Industries (supra) is of no help to learned counsel for the petitioner. 8. In that view of the matter, I am not inclined to entertain the instant writ petition and it is accordingly dismissed in limine. No order as to costs.