CWP No.622/2007. 10.05.2007 Present: Mrs. Ranjana Parmar, Advocate, for the petitioner. Mr. R.M. Bisht, Dy. Advocate General, for the respondents. The only grievance of the petitioner is that the original application filed by the petitioner before the Administrative Tribunal has been admitted and has been fixed for hearing in due course even though the application for early hearing has been allowed. The petitioner’s grievance in the original application is that he has not been paid the subsistence allowance. Mrs. Ranjana Parmar, learned counsel for the petitioner has contended that though her application for early hearing was allowed, but the petition was admitted and matter has been ordered to be listed for hearing in due course. She submitted that these orders are totally contradictory. Prima-facie her submission appears to be correct. However, since the Original Application was filed in the year 2004 only, in our view, the petitioner may approach the learned Tribunal for redressal of her grievance by filing an application for early hearing of the case. The writ petition is disposed of. No costs. (Deepak Gupta),J. May 10, 2007. (Surinder Singh),J. (Pds)