JUDGEMENT 1. Heard learned Counsel for the petitioner and the learned Counsel for the State. 2. In view of the earlier order in CWJC No. 12196 of 2009 and the present submission on behalf of the respondents that the departmental enquiry has been concluded and second show cause notice issued, not controverted by the petitioner, there is no occasion to consider the issue of suspension. 3. The order of this Court has been served on the respondents on 24.9.2009 and considered by the impugned order dated 10.11.2009. 4. It is submitted that the direction of the Court on the earlier occasion to ensure payment of subsistence allowance has not been complied with and does not even find consideration in the impugned order. 5. Payment of subsistence allowance to a suspended employee is a statutory right. It is the obligation of the respondents to pay the same. There is no requirement for the delinquent to make a demand. The responsibility for fulfillment of the statutory obligation and the authority for compliance lie with the respondents themselves. The refusal to deal with the aspect of subsistence allowance in the impugned order prima facie satisfies this Court of gross arbitrariness on the part of the respondents. 6. If the petitioner has not been paid his subsistence allowance from the date of suspension or if there be any arrears of subsistence allowance, this Court directs respondent no. 2 to ensure that it is paid to the petitioner within a maximum period of four weeks from the date of receipt and/or presentation of a copy of this order. 7. This Court is further satisfied that if for an issue as simple as subsistence allowance, if a person is compelled to approach this Court under Article 226 for interference on what is purely an administrative function, he is entitled to be considered for grant of interest from the date that the payment was due till the date it is paid. 8. No useful purpose will be served by referring this matter to the respondent no. 2, the author of the impugned order. 9. Let the Chief Secretary of the State of Bihar examine the issue for grant of reasonable interest to the petitioner after fixing responsibility. The amount of interest paid to the petitioner is then directed to be recovered from the salary of the erring officer whatever rank he may hold. 2, the author of the impugned order. 9. Let the Chief Secretary of the State of Bihar examine the issue for grant of reasonable interest to the petitioner after fixing responsibility. The amount of interest paid to the petitioner is then directed to be recovered from the salary of the erring officer whatever rank he may hold. Let this part of the order be complied with within a maximum period of three months from the date of receipt and/or production of a copy of this order. 10. The writ application stands disposed.