ORDER The petitioner- appellant was an employee in the police department. A proceeding was initiated while he was in the service. Charges were framed but it was served on him after retirement. In the proceeding an order was passed that he shall be entitled only for subsistence allowance for the period of suspension. The said order was challenged in the writ petition in CWJC No. 10104 of 2002. The said writ petition was dismissed on 7.2.2003. The aforesaid order has been challenged in this letters patent appeal. Learned counsel for the appellant submitted that the continuance of proceeding after retirement is bad in law. It is admitted fact that the proceeding was initiated while the petitioner appellant was in service. Charges were framed while he was in service. It was served on him after superannuation. Since the proceeding was initiated during the service, it cannot be said that the proceeding shall not continue. Thus, on consideration of the submission made by learned counsel for the parties, we find nothing wrong in the impugned order. Accordingly, it is dismissed.