3.It is seen that the petitioner who was working as community organiser in the respondent corporation was placed under suspension on 26.03.2014. The petitioner already approached this Court by filing W.P.(MD)No.8626 of 2014 and sought for Mandamus directing the respondents to revoke the suspension. This Court by an order dated 10.06.2014 directed the respondents therein to consider the representation of the petitioner seeking for revocation and pass order on merits and in accordance with law. Thereafter, the petitioner filed representation on 14.02.2015 seeking for revocation of suspension. When such a representation is pending and the suspension is not revoked so far, I am of the view that the present prayer sought for in this writ petition is totally misconceived. Accordingly, this writ petition is disposed of only with a direction to the respondents to consider the representation of the petitioner dated 14.02.2015 and pass appropriate orders on the same, on merits and in accordance with law, within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. It is represented by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the subsistence allowance has not been paid so far. However, if it is not paid, the respondents shall pay subsistence allowance to the petitioner from the date of suspension without any further delay. No costs. Consequently, M.P (MD)No.1 of 2015 is closed.
