( 1 ) THIS Writ Appeal arises out of the judgment of a learned single Judge in W. P. No. 233 of 1955 negativing the request of the petitioner not to deduct any amounts from the subsistence allowance he is entitled to be paid.

( 2 ) THE appellant was working in the Life Insurance Corporation at the relevant time as Assistant Administrative Officer. He was kept under suspension with effect from 7/03/1994 because of certain administrative lapses committed by him for which disciplinary action was initiated and criminal prosecution was also launched for misappropriation of certain amount of money. Regulation 37 of the LIC (Staff) Regulations governs matters relating to subsistence allowance. It reads :"an employee under suspension shall be entitled to subsistence allowance as specified hereunder :- (a) Where the enquiry is domestic, for the first 90 days of suspension, 50% of the salary which the employee would have drawn had he been on privilege leave; 75% of the salary thereafter. Provided that where such enquiry is prolonged beyond a period of 90 days for reasons directly attributable to the employee, the subsistence allowance shall, for the period exceeding 90 days, be reduced to 1/4th of such salary. (b) Where the enquiry is conducted by an outside agency, for the first 180 days of suspension, 50% of the salary he would have drawn had been on privilege leave; 75% of the salary thereafter. Provided that where such enquiry is prolonged beyond a period of 180 days for reasons directly attributable to the employee, the subsistence allowance shall, for the period exceeding 180 days, be reduced to 1/4th of such salary. "the claim of the petitioner is that the respondent Corporation has been deducting from his subsistence allowance - Income Tax, Profession Tax, Court Attachment, Housing Loan and Licence Fee in consequence of which very paltry amount is paid to him every month - in certain months the subsistence allowance was as low as Rs. 240. 00 and in certain other months it was as high as Rs. 2,740. 00. As per the calculation given by him, the subsistence allowance he is entitled to be paid comes to Rs. 6,379-20 Ps.

( 3 ) THE LIC filed counter contesting the claim of the appellant. In the counter affidavit the details as to the lapses committed by the appellant, the misappropriation and the criminal charge to which he was subjected to, his consequential surrender before the Metropolitan Magistrate and the order passed by the learned Magistrate remanding him to judicial custody have been stated.

( 4 ) THE learned single Judge dismissed the Writ Petition after hearing both sides taking the view that under Regulation 37, it is not open to the appellant to contend that the amounts liable to be deducted from his salary should not be deducted from the subsistence allowance. The learned Judge expressed the view that no such restrictions or limitations are found in Regulation 37 and if such an interpretation were to be placed upon it, it would be against the public interest.

( 5 ) THE learned Counsel for the appellant has contended before us that under Section 60 of the Civil Procedure Code, the entire subsistence allowance must be paid and there should not be any deductions. He also contends that the object behind the payment of subsistence allowance is to enable an employee under suspension to survive and that the same cannot be flouted by effecting several deductions on the ground that those deductions are the liabilities of the employee.

( 6 ) WE are not inclined to accept the submissions of the learned Counsel for the appellant. Section 60 of the Civil Procedure Code deals with the property liable to attachment and sale in execution of the decree. Clause (i) of sub-Section (1) of Section 60 speaks of situations in which attachment is exempt : any allowance forming part of the emoluments of any servant of he Government or of any servant of a railway company or local authority which the appropriate Government may by notif