This intra court appeal calls in question a learned Single Judge’s order dated 16.04.2014 whereby appellant’s W.P.No.21300/2011 (S-RES) has been negatived. In the said writ petition, he had laid a challenge to the penalty order followed by a Disciplinary Proceeding which directed with-holding of two increments without cumulative effect for the proven mis-conduct of misappropriation of public money.

2. Learned counsel appearing for the appellant in all fairness, but with vehemence argues that his client’s grievance is confined to the action of the respondent- employer in not treating the suspension period for the purpose of accrual of salary minus what is paid by way of subsistence allowance. He presses into service Rule 100(1) of Karnataka Civil Services Rules ,1957 to the effect that the appellant having been penalized post retirement, the period of suspension should earn him the salary, of course minus the subsistence allowance. Learned Sr. Advocate appearing for the 1st respondent-employer repels the said contention making submission in justification of the impugned order. He points out that there is no scope for invocation of Rule 100(1) of KCSR, the appellant a retire