K. Veeraraghavan, J.

This writ appeal is listed today for final hearing and we heard the learned counsel for the appellant and the learned counsel for the first respondent and the learned Government Pleader for second respondent.

2. The present writ appeal arises out of the impugned order passed in W.P.(MD) No.8750 of 2006 dated 12. 2006, the operative portion of the same is reproduced below.

"(12) Applying the above principles to the facts of this case and the petitioners suspension beyond one year is held unsustainable by this Court in W.P.No.946 of 2004, dated 10. 2004. The second respondent is bound to pay full salary to the petitioner from the date of expiry of one year period i.e., 8. 2003 to 112. 2004. The order of suspension prior to 8. 2003, can be regulated by the respondent in accordance with the rules. Hence, the second respondent is directed to pay full salary to the petitioner from 8. 2003 to 112. 2004, within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order."

The appellant is the second respondent in the impugned order in W.P. No.8750 of 2006 and the first respondent is second respondent in the appeal and the petitioner in the writ pe