The court held that withholding salaries for work is a violation of Article 23, equating it to forced labour, and mandated immediate payment to uphold human dignity.

ORDER :

(PER: THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.NAGAPRASANNA)

1. The petitioners are before this Court calling in question an order passed by this Court on 20.11.2025 in Writ Petition No.104367 of 2025, by which the salary was directed to be paid to those teachers, who are working and not paid salary, which would amount to begar under Article 23 of the Constitution of India.

2. Heard Sri.Vitthal S Teli, learned counsel appearing for the petitioners, Smt.Girija S. Hiremath, learned HCGP appearing for respondent Nos.1 to 4, Sri.Kishor Sutar, learned counsel appearing for respondent No.5, Smt.Vaibhavi Inamdar, learned counsel appearing for respondent Nos.6 to 9, Sri.Pranav S.Katageri, learned counsel appearing for respondent No.10.

3. The petitioners are said to be the erstwhile members of respondent No.10 - Society. The petitioners are said to have approached this Court in Writ Petition No.105646 of 2022, by which the Co-ordinate Bench had allowed the writ petition and set aside certain orders passed by the Society, which was said to be indulging in illegal appointments. The writ appeal was filed against the said order. It is indicated that the writ appeal has stood withdrawn. After which a review petition comes to be filed before the learned Judge who had passed the order in Writ Petition No.105646 of 2022 and the said review petition comes to be dismissed.

4. The petitioners now who are claiming to be erstwhile members of the respondent No.10 Society are before the Court contending that a direction to pay salary to the three petitioners should not have been directed in the teeth of full facts not being brought before the Court by the petitioners in the said Writ Petition No.104367 of 2025. The said writ petition was preferred in the teeth of the non-payment of salary by the petitioners not by the present petitioners from their pockets, but by the State as the reason was that it was an Aided institution. This Court after hearing the parties has passed the following order:

“3. Facts in brief, germane, are as follows:

The fifth respondent is the Institution which receives grants from the hands of the State. As necessary, on 29.09.2022, permission is granted by respondent No.2 to fill up all the vacant posts in respondent No.5 – School. The process of selection would commence and the result of the selection is appointment of the petitioners as Assistant Teachers in the fifth respondent – School. Pursuant to the said appointment, the salaries of the petitioners are fixed and appointment order dated 24.03.2023, are issued again with the concurrence of the government. The petitioners like every person works without break. On 16.05.2024, it transpires that the State withholds salaries which the petitioners allege to be without any rhyme or reason. Challenging the said action of withholding of salaries, the petitioners approach this Court in W.P.No.104223/2024. A coordinate bench of this Court grants an interim order of stay of the communication which directs withholding the salaries of the petitioners, on 23.07.2024. The order reads as follows:

"Learned HCGP is directed to take notice for respondent Nos.1 to 4.

Issue emergent notice to respondent Nos.5 and 6.

By impugned communication dated 16.05.2024, produced at Annexure-E, the salary payable to the petitioners is sought to be withheld with immediate effect without any prior notice or without there being any challenge to their very appointment.

There shall be stay of the Annexure-E, till the next date of hearing.

List on 28.08.2024."

(Emphasis supplied)

This is the first writ petition filed by the petitioners.

4. After the grant of an interim order in the aforesaid writ petition, a show cause notice comes to be issued to the petitioners as to why their appointment should not