Judgment 1. Heard Mr. Anil Kumar Tiwari in support of the review application. 2. Mr. Tiwari makes a reference to the following observation in the order of which review is prayed for : "It may be noted that this point was fully available to the petitioner in his first writ petition (CWJC No. 6127 of 1990). In that case, this point was either not urged or not entertained by the court as that writ petition was dismissed leaving it open to the petitioner only to challenge the order dismissing his departmental appeal." 3. Mr. Tiwari submitted that the observation was incorrect inasmuch as in CWJC No. 6127 of 1990, the point regarding non-payment of his subsistence allowance during the period of his suspension was specifically raised on behalf of the applicant but was left undecided by the court. In support of this statement he made a reference to the order, dated August 2, 1996 passed in the aforesaid writ petition. 4. The reference to that order is quite misconceived inasmuch as by a latter order, dated 28.1.1997 passed in that writ petition, the order, dated 2.8.1996 relied upon by Mr. Tiwari was recalled and the writ petition was disposed of in terms of the order, dated 28.1.1997. In the latter order, dated 28.1.1997 there is no mention regarding non-payment of subsistence ailowance to the applicant. The order having been recalled, no reliance can be placed on it in support of this review petition. 5. On hearing Mr. Tiwari, we are satisfied that no case is made out for review of the order, dated 28.7.2000 by which L.P.A. No. 1028 of 2000 was dismissed. This review application is accordingly dismissed.