Judgment :- M.M. Sundresh, J. 1. This Writ Appeal has been preferred by the appellant challenging the order passed by a learned single Judge, by which, the order of dismissal passed against the respondent was set aside, with a direction to pay the arrears of subsistence allowance. 2. Today, when the matter is taken up for hearing, the learned Government Advocate, on instructions, submitted that the respondent had already been dismissed, which submission has also been acknowledged by the learned counsel appearing for the respondent. Furthermore, the order of dismissal has become final. 3. Considering the admitted fact that the appointment of the respondent was casual and temporary, we are not able to find any Rule, which deals with the mandatory payment of subsistence allowance. Therefore, considering these facts, we are inclined to allowed this appeal and accordingly, the writ appeal stands allowed, insofar as the direction of the learned single Judge regarding payment of subsistence allowance is concerned, as the other direction had already been complied with by the appellant, pursuant to which, the respondent had been dismissed. No costs. M.P.No.1 of 2011 is closed.