The principle of 'no work no pay' prevails when an employee deliberately absents from the workplace without providing sufficient and reasonable grounds for such absence.

ORDER

Chandra Dhari Singh, J. (Oral)

1. The instant petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, 1950 has been filed on behalf of the petitioner seeking the following reliefs:

"a. To issue Writ of Mandamus or any other appropriate writ(s) directing the Respondents to recall the reassignment letter dated 25.01.2019 on the grounds of it being bad in law and violative of rights of the Petitioner.

b. To pass any other writ(s), order(s) or direction(s) which this Hon'ble Court may deem just and proper under the facts and circumstances of , the case, as in India Public Sector Undertakings are regarded as Lighthouses of Equality which the respondents have dented, in the interest of justice."

2. The petitioner has been working in the respondent No. 1 Corporation (`respondent Corporation' hereinafter) since 1986. In 2019, the petitioner was transferred and reassigned to another location vide reassignment letter No. MNZ.KG.PERS/T dated 25th January, 2019. However, the said relocation was refused by the petitioner on apprehension that he has been assigned to the job of a stenographer.

3. The petitioner requested the respondent Organization to allot him another job profile, but the same was denied. On 2nd March 2019, the petitioner received another letter bearing No. HR-NZ/MB as a reminder about the reassignment and directed him to report at the reassigned location.

4. Thereafter, the petitioner made a representation vide letter dated 23rd April, 2019 and stated the reasons for not joining the office. In the reply, the petitioner was apprised of the reasons for the said relocation and he was directed to join the office. Thereafter, the respondent Corporation started marking him absent and stopped disbursing the salaries since March, 2019.

5. Aggrieved by the same, the petitioner filed the instant petition.

6. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the petitioner joined the respondent Corporation as a Clerk-cum-Typist in Grade M and was holding the post of Chief Administrative Superintendent before the said relocation.

7. It is submitted that the relocation letter does not mention any provision/clause providing power to the respondent Organization to issue directions of such nature.

8. It is submitted that the petitioner holds a degree in B.Com (Hons.) and M.com and has been serving as Administrative Superintendent till date and therefore, cannot be absorbed as a stenographer.

9. It is submitted that the petitioner had been going to the previous office and had started marking his attendance in the staff register, however, the same was removed in order to prevent the petitioner from being marked present. Thereafter, the petitioner started marking his presence in the visitor's register.

10. It is submitted that since February, 2019 the respondent Corporation had started deductions from the salaries, resulting in non-disbursement of salaries for the months of April, May and June, 2019 and a meagre salary of Rs. 2869.42 was paid for the month of March, 2019.

11. Therefore, in view of the foregoing submissions, the petitioner seeks this Court be pleased to allow the present petition.

12. Per Contra, the learned counsel appearing for the respondents vehemently opposed the petition and submitted that the petitioner was posted in MB Lal Implementation Department, however, the department was closed down and therefore, the petitioner was relocated to a different location vide letter No. MNZ.KG.PERS/T dated 25th January, 2019.

13. It is submitted that the petitioner was reassigned to `Cluster C' and as per the Career Development Policy (`CDP' hereinafter) of the respondent Corporation, the employees falling in the said category are mandated to work in different roles and the petitioner was not assigned the role of stenographer.

14. It is submitted that the petitioner refused to accept the reassignment order, ultimately refusing to join the new office. Therefore, the respondent Corporation sent the said co