JUDGMENT : Heard Mr. Saurabh Shekhar the learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. J.F. Toppo, the learned S.C.-VII appearing for the respondent State. 2. This writ petition has been heard through Video Conferencing in view of the guidelines of the High Court taking into account the situation arising due to COVID-19 pandemic. None of the parties have complained about any technical snag of audio-video and with their consent this matter has been heard on merit. 3. The petitioner has preferred this writ petition for quashing of the order dated 21.07.2014 as contained in Annexure-1 issued by respondent no.4 whereby the petitioner was suspended from service in anticipation of one departmental proceeding which has been concluded in exoneration of the present petitioner. The further prayer is made for quashing the order dated 23.01.2015 as contained in Annexure-4 wherein it has been observed that the present petitioner will be entitled only for subsistence allowance for the period of suspension that is, 21.07.2014 to 23.01.2015. The further prayer is made for the release of the arrears of the salary for the period of suspension w.e.f 21.07.2014 to 23.01.2015. 4. The case of the petitioner is that the petitioner was served with an order of suspension on 21.07.2014 as contained in Memo No.103 issued by the respondent no.4 whereby on the allegation of non-cooperation and violation of the order of the departmental officers the petitioner was kept under suspension. The order speaks that the petitioner will be entitled for the subsistence allowance. The petitioner was served with a memorandum of charge dated 30.08.2014 in relation to withholding of the mid-day meal in the school and non-cooperation with the departmental officers. The departmental proceeding was initiated and the petitioner submitted his reply and in the enquiry, it came that the petitioner is not involved in the matter. The allegations levelled against the petitioner have been found to be not proved. He has been exonerated from all the charges in the enquiry report which was submitted on 12.01.2015 as contained in Annexure-3. By order dated 23.01.2015 whereby the suspension of the petitioner revoked with the rider that the petitioner shall not be paid anything else than the subsistence allowance for the period of suspension extending from 21.07.2014 – 23.01.2015. Aggrieved with this part of the order, this writ petition has been filed. 5. Mr. By order dated 23.01.2015 whereby the suspension of the petitioner revoked with the rider that the petitioner shall not be paid anything else than the subsistence allowance for the period of suspension extending from 21.07.2014 – 23.01.2015. Aggrieved with this part of the order, this writ petition has been filed. 5. Mr. Saurabh Shekhar, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that there is no question of passing of the said order as there is no punishment order against the petitioner and the petitioner has already been exonerated. The petitioner has already retired on 31.01.2015 and the rest of the amount has already been paid in view of Rule 97 sub-rule (2) of the Jharkhand Service Code. The respondents are bound to release the salary of that period that is 21.07.2014 to 23.01.2015 in view of the Rule 97(2) of the Jharkhand Service Code, 2001. 6. Mr. J. F. Toppo, the learned S.C.-VII appearing on behalf of the respondent State submits that so far other dues are concerned that have already been paid. He submits that he will take instruction with regard to the submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner. 7. The Court has considered the submissions of the learned counsels for the parties and in view of sub-rule 2 of the Rule 97 of Jharkhand Service Code, 2001, the Court comes to a conclusion that there is no need of further instruction as the statutory rule is already there which says that in case of exoneration full pay and allowance will be paid to the Government servant. For the sake of convenience, Rule 97(2) is quoted hereinbelow: “97 (2). Where the authority mentioned in sub-rule(1), is of the opinion that the Government servant has been fully exonerated, or in the case of suspension, that it was wholly unjustified, the Government servant shall be given full pay and allowance to which he would have been entitled has he not been dismissed, removed or suspended, as the case may be.” 8. In view of the statutory provision under sub-rule 2 of Rule 97 of the Jharkhand Service Code, 2001, the part of the impugned order dated 23.01.2015 as contained in Annexure-4 cannot sustain in the eye of law. Accordingly, the same is quashed. 9. In view of the statutory provision under sub-rule 2 of Rule 97 of the Jharkhand Service Code, 2001, the part of the impugned order dated 23.01.2015 as contained in Annexure-4 cannot sustain in the eye of law. Accordingly, the same is quashed. 9. The respondents are directed to release the salary for the period from 21.07.2014 to 23.01.2015 in favour of the petitioner within a period of eight weeks from the date of receipt /production of a copy of this order. 10. The writ petition [W.P. (S) No. 1434 of 2018] stands partly allowed and disposed of.