Back
2008 Supreme(Jhk) 1195
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND
D.G.R. Patnaik, J.
Mrs. Kalyani Chaudhary – Appellants.
Vs.
State of Jharkhand and Ors. – Respondent
Decided On : 20.10.2008
The 'No Work No Pay' principle cannot be applied to deny the rightful claim of an employee if the employee's joining was not accepted, and she was kept waiting for her posting.
Headnote:
Salary - Denial of Salary - No Work No Pay - [Petitioner's joining not accepted, kept waiting for posting, denial of arrears of salary, District Superintendent acknowledging claim for payment, application allowed]
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner, a teacher, was denied her salary for the period of 10.7.2000 to 17.1.2002 on the ground of 'No Work No Pay' principle. The petitioner's joining at the school was not accepted, and she was kept waiting for her posting despite several representations and requests.
Finding of the Court:
The court found merit in the application and allowed it, quashing the impugned order and directing the respondent to pay the petitioner the arrears of salary with interest within three months.
Issues: The issues revolved around the denial of salary to the petitioner based on the 'No Work No Pay' principle, the acceptance of the petitioner's joining, and the acknowledgment of her claim for payment by the District Superintendent.
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the 'No Work No Pay' principle cannot be applied to deny the rightful claim of the petitioner, especially when her joining was not accepted, and she was kept waiting for her posting. The acknowledgment of the claim for payment by the District Superintendent further supported the petitioner's case.
Final Decision: The court allowed the application, quashed the impugned order, and directed the respondent to pay the petitioner the arrears of salary with interest within three months.
D.G.R. Patnaik, J.
1. Petitioner in this writ application has prayed for quashing the letter dated 15.1.2005 (Annexure-16), by which the salary of the petitioner for the period 10.7.2000 to 17.1.2002 has been denied to her.
2. The decision taken by the respondents-authorities vide the impugned letter has been challenged on the ground that it is illegal, arbitrary and devoid of any justifiable grounds.
3. Petitioner's case in brief is that she was initially appointed on the post of Assistant Teacher in a middle School on 30.3.1987. During, the course of her service, she was transferred to several schools on many occasions. The last transfer was made by order dated 10.7.2000 to Primary School, Kashidih Block, Chauparan. On her being relieved from the School, where she was posted on 10.7.2000, the petitioner submitted her joining at the Primary School, Kashidih Block, Chauparan on 15.7.2000 by submitting her joining letter (Annexure-1). However, the Headmaster of the School did not accept her joining, on the ground that no post was vacant for the petitioner at the said School. The petitioner filed her representation before the District Superintendent of Education, Hazaribagh (Respondent No. 3) on 17.7.2000 informing that she had submitted her joining on 15.7.2000 but the same was not accepted by the Headmaster of the School. The Headmaster of the School had also informed, by his letter dated 17.7.2000 (Annexure-3), the District Superintendent of Education that though the petitioner had submitted her letter of joining in terms of her transfer orders but the same could not be accepted on account of the fact that there was no vacant post in the School for the petitioner.
Thereafter, the petitioner, by her letters dated 21.7.2000 and 26.7.2000 (Annexures-4 and 4/1) addressed to the District Superintendent of Education (Respondent No. 3), requested for her posting at any suitable place and expecting her posting, the petitioner remained at the Headquarter at Hazaribagh. After keeping her waiting for one and half years till 16.1.2002, the respondents-authorities had offered her posting in the school at Pasai, Kutkamasandi Block, where she joined on 17.1.2002.
Again by another order of transfer dated 9.10.2002 (Annexure-6), she was transferred to the Boys' School, P.S. Kumhartoli, Municipal Block, Kutkamasandi Block.
The further case of the petitioner is that another teacher, namely, Sushila Gupta, along with the petitioner was also kept waiting at the Headquarters for her posting and after a considerable period, she too was given the posting at another school.
The petitioner's grievance is that on the one hand the respondents-authorities paid the arrears of salary to the other teacher, namely, Sushila Gupta for the period during which she remained at the Headquarter without proper posting, but the petitioner's claim for her salary, has been denied to her on the ground that she was "absent from duty" and therefore, she was not entitled to any salary on the principle of "No Work No Pay".
4. The petitioner, thereafter filed a writ petition vide W.P. (S) No. 3311 of 2004. While disposing of the aforesaid writ application by order dated 15.7.2004, this Court had directed the petitioner to file a fresh representation before the District Superintendent of Education, Hazaribagh with a corresponding direction to the D.S.E. to consider the petitioner's representation and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of the representation.
The petitioner filed her representation before the District Superintendent of Education in accordance with the orders passed by this Court.
It is further stated that after consideration of the representation submitted by petitioner, the District Superintendent of Education, Hazaribagh vide his letters (Annexures-12 and 14) addressed to the Director of Education, has prayed for allotment of funds in order to meet the budget expenses including the arrears of salary
