Judgment 1. Heard Thiru.K.Venkatramani, learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner. 2. The learned Senior Counsel argued at length with regard to the mala fides in preferring the complaint by the accused. According to the learned Senior Counsel, the second respondent has not conducted enquiry with due opportunity to the petitioner. The learned Senior Counsel, therefore, wanted stay of all further proceedings pursuant to the suspension order. When it was pointed out that the authority of the first respondent to suspend the employees is not under challenge, the learned Senior Counsel, on instructions from the petitioner through the counsel on record fairly submitted that he is withdrawing the Writ Petition and prayed for a direction to the first respondent to consider the representation dated 30.05.2014. 3. In view of the endorsement made by the learned counsel on record for the petitioner, the Writ petition is dismissed as withdrawn. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petitions are closed. 4. The first respondent is directed to consider and dispose of the representation, dated 30.05.2014, on merits and in accordance with law. Such exercise shall be completed within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.