S. B. SINHA, CJ. ( 1 ) HAVING heard the learned counsel for the parties and keeping in view the fact that against the appellant herein departmental proceedings have been initiated, the respondent- corporation as a model employer ought not to have put him off the duty. The learned Standing counsel for the respondent-Corporation, however, submits that the appellant herein was a daily rated worker. Even if that be so, in our opinion, he had not been treated as such, as departmental proceedings have been initiated against him for enquiry into the allegations of misconduct. In such situation, the employer can only suspend the employee in terms of the rules, for which he would be entitled to claim subsistence allowance or the employer may invoke its inherent jurisdiction to suspend an employee by not taking any work from him in which event he would be entitled to the full salary. We therefore, in modification of the order passed by the learned single Judge, direct that an appropriate order in the light of the observations made above, be passed by the respondents at an early date and not later than 2 weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. However, the respondent- corporation is directed to pay full wages to the appellant until an appropriate order is passed in this regard. ( 2 ) THE writ appeal is accordingly disposed of with the above directions. No costs.