Salary during termination period is illegally stopped by the department

This article discusses the legality of withholding salary during the period of termination or suspension from service. It examines the rights of an employee to claim salary, subsistence allowance, and other consequential benefits where the departmental action is alleged to be arbitrary, illegal, or contrary to service rules and principles of natural justice.

Salary during termination period is illegally stopped by the department on the basis of order of the court. I was illegally terminated from the service by the concerned authority on the false allegation of grave misconduct. When I challenged that order in the high court, the court quashed that order and directed me to reinstate with consequential benefits. Court did not mention anything about the back wages. Department said that there is no specific order about salary during the termination period. I am not entitled to receive a salary on the principle of no work no pay. Should I file a fresh writ petition?

Asked from: Uttar Pradesh

The Hon’ble High Court has ordered your reinstatement with all consequential service benefits. It is a well-established principle of law that salary is an integral part of service benefits. Based on the court's order, it is evident that you have been fully exonerated, as the termination order has been quashed, and your reinstatement has been directed with all important service benefits. Consequently, you are entitled to the salary for the period of your termination.

Salary during termination period

The phrase “reinstatement with all consequential service benefits” encompasses arrear of salary during termination period. Even though the court's order may not explicitly state salary payment for this period, the expression clearly implies that salary arrears are included.

Department is bound to pay arrears of salary

On these legal grounds the department is bound to pay the arrears of salary during the termination period. There was no fault on your side. The reasons for stopping payment are not maintainable.

  1. No Fault on Your Part
    • The termination was executed without valid grounds and with mala fide intent.
    • You were willing and able to work, but the department illegally prevented you from doing so.
    • The illegality of the termination has been recognized and rectified by the High Court.
  2. Right to Livelihood
    • Under Article 21 of the Constitution of India, the right to livelihood is a fundamental right and forms an integral part of personal liberty.
    • No individual can be deprived of salary except through a procedure established by law. The termination order being illegal means that depriving you of your salary was also unlawful.
  3. Supreme Court Judgment on "No Work, No Pay"
    • The Hon’ble Supreme Court, in Union of India v. K.V. Jankiraman [(1991) 4 SCC 109 : AIR 1991 SC 2010], held that the rule of "no work, no pay" does not apply in cases where an employee, though willing to work, is kept away from work by the authorities through no fault of their own.
    • This is directly relevant to your case. The denial of work was due to the department's illegal act, not your choice or conduct. Therefore, you are entitled to receive salary of termination period.

You should not file a fresh writ petition instead of it you should file a contempt application (consult advocate). However, the court did not explicitly say about the salary for termination period but in the expression "reinstate with all consequential service benefits" includes the payment of arrear of salary.
The department's attempt to invoke the principle of "no work, no pay" is not applicable in your case. The termination order was quashed as illegal, and the High Court has directed your reinstatement with all consequential service benefits, which includes salary arrears for the termination period. You are entitled to these arrears, and the appropriate legal step is to file a contempt application to ensure compliance with the High Court's order.

Tags: Salary

Shivendra Pratap Singh

Shivendra Pratap Singh

Advocate

Advocate Shivendra, practicing law since 2005, specializes in criminal and matrimonial cases, extensive litigatin experience before the High Court, Sessions court & Family Court. He established kanoonirai.com in 2014 to provide dependable and pragmatic legal support. Over the years, he has successfully assisted thousands of clients, making the platform a trusted resource for criminal and matrimonial dispute resolution in India.

Related Matters

Terminated from service for mere misconduct

This legal guidance explains the remedies available to an employee terminated from service for alleged misconduct without proper inquiry or proportional punishment. It discusses principles of natural justice, departmental proceedings, wrongful termination, reinstatement, back wages, and the legal remedies available before labour courts, tribunals, or constitutional courts.

Daily wager service is terminated on misbehavior

This article discusses the legal implications of termination of service of a daily wager on allegations of misconduct or misbehavior. It examines whether principles of natural justice, departmental inquiry, and opportunity of hearing are required before terminating the services of a temporary or daily wage employee, along with the remedies available under labour and service laws.

Terminated from service by following illegal proceedings

This article examines the legality of termination orders passed after defective or unlawful departmental proceedings. It discusses violations of principles of natural justice, procedural irregularities in disciplinary inquiries, denial of reasonable opportunity of hearing, and the remedies available to an employee against illegal termination from service.

Promotion of ineligible candidate violating the principle of seniority cum merit

This article discusses the legality of granting promotion to an ineligible candidate in violation of the principle of seniority-cum-merit. It examines the rights of eligible employees, the scope of judicial review in service matters, and the circumstances in which a promotion order may be challenged before the High Court or service tribunal on the grounds of arbitrariness, discrimination, or breach of statutory service rules.