The Chhattisgarh High Court recently comprising of a bench of Justice Sanjay K. Agrawal held that when the Fundamental Rules expressly provide for the grant of full pay and allowances on the exoneration of a Government servant from punishment/criminal charges, the principle of 'No Work No Pay' would have no application. (Rajendra Sharma & Ors v. State of Chhattisgarh & Ors.)
The bench remarked that the principle of 'No Work No Pay' would not override sub-rule (2) of Rule 54 of the Fundamental Rules, which provides for full pay and allowances on full exoneration.
Facts of the case.
The petitioner, a Jail Guard, was terminated from service by the competent authority. He preferred an appeal before the appellate authority, which was allowed, and he was then reinstated in service.
However, the full pay and allowances from the date of termination till the date of reinstatement was not granted by the appellate authority.
The petitioner filed the present petition questioning this part of order, of not granting full pay and allowances.
Contention of the Parties
The counsel appearing for the petitioner, submitted that full pay and allowances from the date of termination till the date of reinstatement ought to have been granted to the petitioner in the light of Rule 54 (2) of the Fundamental Rules, whereas it has not been granted on the principle of 'No Work No Pay', as such, the principle of 'No Work No Pay' would not be applicable.
On the other hand, the counsel appearing for the respondent-State, submitted that the appellate authority has considered the facts and circumstances of the case and rightly held that the petitioner is not entitled for full pay and allowances on the principle of 'No Work No Pay'.
Courts Observation and Judgment
The Court noted that Rule 54(2) of the Fundamental Rules entitles the Government servant for full pay and allowances in case of full exoneration.
It was noted that the principle of 'No Work No Pay' was based upon a fundamental concept in a Law of Contact of Employment, where wages and salary were paid by the employer in consideration of work/service rendered by the employee.
Thus Court added that, " 'No Work No Pay' principle has been laid down keeping in view public interest that a Government servant who does not discharge his duty is not allowed pay and arrears at the cost of public exchequer."
Referring to the judgement of the Apex Court in the State of Bihar and Ors. v. Kripa Nand Singh & Anr. where it was observed that 'No Work No Pay' is the rule and 'No Work Yet Pay' is the exception, the Court stated that the exception would apply only when an employee was compelled (compulsory waiting period) not to attend his duty without any violation or any fault on his part.
Further reliance was placed on Commissioner Karnataka Housing Board v. C. Muddaiah, where the Supreme Court reiterated that the principle of 'No Work No Pay' was not absolute in a given case, if the person was willing to work but was illegally and unlawfully not allowed to do so; the Court may, in the circumstances, direct the authority to grant him all benefits considering "as if he had worked".
After examining the precedents, the Court noted, "In the considered opinion of this Court, the principle of 'No Work No Pay' would not be applicable where the rule expressly direct otherwise like subrule (2) of Rule 54 of the Fundamental Rules, which clearly provides that the Government servant who had been dismissed, removed or compulsorily retired has been fully exonerated, shall be paid full pay and allowances to which he would have been entitled, had he not been dismissed, removed or compulsorily retired, but subject to proviso to subrule (2) of Rule 54 and if the termination of the proceedings instituted against the Government servant had been delayed due to reasons directly attributable to the Government servant, but in that case also, the amount determined under proviso to subrule (2) shall not be less than the subsistence allowance and other allowances admissible under Rule 53, as such, when the rule expressly provides for grant of full pay and allowances on full exoneration of the Government servant from punishment/criminal charges, the principle of 'No Work No Pay' would have no application and said principle of 'No Work No Pay' would not override subrule (2) of Rule 54 of the the Fundamental Rules which provides full pay and allowances on full exoneration."
The Court thus remitting the matter back to the appellate authority to consider the case of the petitioner for grant of full pay and allowances noted, accordingly the part of impugned order of 2010 holding the petitioner to be not entitled for full pay and allowances from the date of termination till the date of reinstatement was set aside.
Read Judgment ;
source ; www.latestlaws.com
Social media is bold.
Social media is young.
Social media raises questions.
Social media is not satisfied with an answer.
Social media looks at the big picture.
Social media is interested in every detail.
social media is curious.
Social media is free.
Social media is irreplaceable.
But never irrelevant.
Social media is you.
(With input from news agency language)
If you like this story, share it with a friend!
We are a non-profit organization. Help us financially to keep our journalism free from government and corporate pressure
0 Comments