Salary is a consideration for services rendered. Under the 'no work no pay' doctrine, an employee is not entitled to wages during a period of absence unless they prove they were willing to work but were prevented by the employer's illegal action.

JUDGMENT :

Rai Chattopadhyay, J.

1. In this writ petition, the petitioner has challenged part of order of the 4^th respondent/Managing Director of the Corporation dated June 26, 2020. He has also prayed for release of his actual salary and pay for the period from February 14, 2005 to May 31, 2015, with interest and other consequential benefits, stating that the same has been arbitrarily and illegally withheld by the respondent/Corporation, in violation of the Amended Standing Order as applicable.

2. Before dealing with the grounds pleaded by the writ petitioner, it is necessary that the relevant background facts narrated in the writ petition to have culminated into the instant writ petition may be mentioned.

3. The writ petitioner has been a permanent employee of the respondent/Corporation since from August 1981 and served as a tram driver [No. 293/641]. In the month of February 2005, when he was posted at Tollygunge Tram Depot, he obtained medical leave due to his illness, from February 14, 2005. He left his work place and took abode at his native place. He continued contacting and informing about his health to the Depot authorities and after recovery approached them in order to resume his duties, though restrained and refused. He has never been allowed to join in service again.

4. On April 27, 2015, the petitioner has been issued a show cause notice by the 6th respondent/Deputy Managing Director of the Corporation alleging intentional absence of the petitioner from February 14, 2005 and therefore his liabilities under the “Leave Rules” of the Corporation. The petitioner gives reply vide his letter dated May 26, 2015 expressing his willingness to join in duties, requesting for issuance of order for resumption of duty and to start regular departmental proceeding against him, as per law. According to him, despite approaching the respondent authority on several occasions requesting to allow him to resume duty, he has been forcefully and illegally refused to join on each occasion.

5. After his reply to the said show cause notice, the petitioner has been issued a charge-sheet dated September 23, 2015, served on him in July 2016. The petitioner has replied to the same vide letter dated July 18, 2016 stating therein inter alia that in terms of the Amended Standing Order Clause- 13, the petitioner can be suspended maximum for 7 days upon issuance of the charge-sheet and therefore he needs to be issued with the order of resumption of duty immediately.

6. The petitioner’s first writ petition was W.P. No. 867 of 2016, which he filed thereafter, claiming the subsistence allowance. The Court has allowed him to be granted with the subsistence allowance though the said order was made effective only during the contempt proceeding. Vide letter dated May 18, 2017, the petitioner has been allowed to resume duty. Before issuance of the said letter the respondent authority started departmental proceeding against the writ petitioner. Pursuant to the order of the Inquiry Officer dated January 3, 2017, the petitioner has submitted his documents and list of witnesses before t