JUDGMENT (Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, to call for the records relating to the proceedings bearing Memo No.1641/SE/KEDC/KPM/Adm4/ A2/F.DP/2013-3 dated 30.10.2013 and the consequential order in Memo No.1641/SE/KEDC/KPM/Adm4/A2/F.DP/2013-4 dated 31.10.2013 of the respondent and quash the same and consequently direct the respondent to permit the petitioner to retire from his services with all terminal benefits such all full pension, leave encashment, etc.) 1. The Writ Petition has been filed challenging the order of suspension and the order not permitting the petitioner to retire from service. 2. The petitioner was appointed as an Assessor in TANGEDCO and the community certificate produced by the petitioner was sent for verification. The District Collector submitted a report stating that the community certificate submitted by the petitioner was bogus and therefore, the respondent-TANGEDCO initiated action against the petitioner under the Discipline and Appeal Rules. The petitioner was placed under suspension on the date of his superannuation on 31.10.2013 and his service was extended for the purpose of continuing with the disciplinary proceedings. 3. The petitioner challenged the order passed by the District Collector in a Writ Petition which was dismissed and the Writ Appeal filed by him was allowed, in which, the correctness of the community certificate was directed to be scrutinized by the State Level Scrutiny Committee. 4. The State Level Scrutiny Committee undertook the process of verification and the learned counsel appearing for the respondent-TANGEDCO furnished the copy of the letter No.5787/CV-4(1)/2012-21, dated 07.06.2022 issued by the Chairman, State Level Scrutiny Committee-III, stating that the address of the petitioner was not correctly given and the notice sent by the State Level Scrutiny Committee was returned. Therefore, the State Level Scrutiny Committee was not in a position to conduct enquiry and pass final orders. 5. In this regard, the learned counsel for the respondent-TANGEDCO made a submission that the petitioner is evading enquiry. However, the learned counsel for the petitioner disputed the said statement by stating that the petitioner is ready and willing to participate in the process of enquiry to be conducted by the State Level Scrutiny Committee. 6. 5. In this regard, the learned counsel for the respondent-TANGEDCO made a submission that the petitioner is evading enquiry. However, the learned counsel for the petitioner disputed the said statement by stating that the petitioner is ready and willing to participate in the process of enquiry to be conducted by the State Level Scrutiny Committee. 6. It is brought to the notice of this Court that the address given in the affidavit filed by the petitioner in the present Writ Petition is the correct address and further, the petitioner is ready to cooperate for conducting an enquiry with reference to the community certificate produced by him for securing appointment in TANGEDCO. 7. The order of the District Collector was challenged by the petitioner by way of a Writ Petition and thereafter, he had also filed a Writ Appeal. The matter was referred to the State Level Scrutiny Committee for conducting an enquiry. Therefore, the petitioner is bound to participate in the process of enquiry and he is expected to pursue the matter. 8. It is now brought to the notice of this Court that the petitioner is residing in the address as stated in the affidavit filed in support of this Writ Petition. Thus, the petitioner is directed to approach the office of the State Level Scrutiny Committee and furnish the correct address and participate in the process of enquiry to be conducted by the State Level Scrutiny Committee. The State Level Scrutiny Committee shall conduct the enquiry as expeditiously as possible and dispose of the same, since the issues are pending for a long time. In the event of any non-cooperation on the part of the petitioner, the respondent is at liberty to continue the departmental disciplinary proceedings based on the records available and conclude the same, as expeditiously as possible. 9. With these observations, the Writ Petition stands disposed of. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed.