WP(C) 1881/2011 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE B.K. SHARMA Heard Mr. B. Sarma, learned counsel for the petitioner as well a s Mr. S. Khound, learned Standing Counsel, BTC. By means of this writ petition, the petitioner has prayed for se tting aside and quashing of the order dated 20.12.2010 (Annexure-1), by which he was placed under suspension pending drawal of departmental proceeding. The peti tioner has also prayed for payment of subsistence allowance. While Mr. Sarma, le arned counsel for the petitioner submits that it is the prerogative of the emplo yer to place an employee under suspension, but it should not be as a routine aff air, Mr. Khound, learned Standing Counsel, BTC submits that since departmental p roceeding has already been initiated and the process towards payment of subsiste nce allowance has also been undertaken, there is no question of revocation of th e order of suspension. Considering the matter in its entirety and in view of the fact t hat the petitioner already preferred an appeal praying for revocation of the ord er of suspension, I dispose of the writ petition directing the Principal Secreta ry, BTC and/or the appellate authority to dispose of the Annexure-3 appeal dated 6.1.2011 taking note of the attending facts and circumstances and in accordance with law. Let the appeal be disposed of as expeditiously as possible, but at any rate, not later than 31.12.2011. If the petitioner is entitled to subsist ence allowance for the period of suspension and/or any part thereof, the respond ents shall also pay the same within this target date. Whatever may be the outcom e of disposal of the appeal of the petitioner, same shall be communicated to him . At this stage, Mr. Sarma, learned counsel for the petitioner sub mits that the petitioner is also entitled to arrear salary from 1.6.2010 to 23.1 2.2010. The respondents may also consider this aspect of the matter taking note of the attending facts and circumstances and in accordance with law.