Kanaya Lal Koul vs State and Anr.

In this writ petition it bud been claimed that the petitioner was suspended some time back but has not been paid subsistance allowance as

required under rules. A notice for admission was issued and the objections have been filed by the respondents.

It appears that as required under rule 108 (a) of the J&K C. S. Rs, it was incumbent on the petitioner to furnish the requisite certificates as

envisaged under rules and on submission of such certificates alone the subsistence allowance could be released in favour of the petitioner. The case

of the respondents was that the subsistence allowance in fovour of the petitioner has been released for such period for which be furnished the

requisite certificates. As it was incumbent on the petitioner to which he appears has not done the respdts were within their powers to withhold the

subsistence allowance in his favour. The petitioner may furnish the requisite certificate if he so desires and the respdts may issue fresh orders with

regard to the release of the sub'istencc allowance in his favour. But this order should not be treated as a direction to the respdts to ralease the

subsistance allowance in favour of the petitioner under all circumstances. The petition is not admitted and is disposed of in time.