JUDGMENT : Pramath Patnaik, J.: In the captioned writ application, the petitioner has inter alia prayed for quashing order as contained in memo dated 17.12.2013 whereby petitioner’s salary has been denied for his non-posting period i.e. from 13.03.2012 to 04.07.2013; and for direction upon the respondents to pay the salary for the said period i.e. from 13.03.2012 to 04.07.2013 and also for direction upon the respondents to pay the consequential benefits of periodical increments for the years 2012 and 2013 including the arrears of salary arising out of such effect. 2. The facts, as delineated in the writ application, shorn of unnecessary details is that the petitioner, who is presently functioning as a Block Extension Educator in the Department of Health & Family Welfare, knocked the door of this Court by way of filing W.P. (S) No. 3852 of 2011 seeking promotion on the post of ‘Block Extension Educator’, which was disposed of vide order dated 10.10.2011 with a direction to Director-in-Chief, Health Services, Jharkhand, Ranchi to consider the case of the petitioner for promotion on the said post from the date when his juniors have been promoted. However, when the said order was not complied with, the petitioner filed Contempt Case (C) No. 810 of 2011, in which, the Opp. Parties filed show cause affidavit annexing memo dated 15.02.2012 whereby a decision was taken to promote the petitioner to the post of Block Education Educator w.e.f. 02.04.2008. Considering the facts aforesaid, the contempt proceeding was dropped with liberty to challenge the order before the appropriate forum which was dropped vide order dated 29.02.2012. It has further been averred that pursuant to order dated 15.02.2012, the petitioner reported before Civil Surgeon, Godda, who vide order dated 13.03.2012 directed to submit his joining before the Medical Officer, In-charge Sunderpahari Godda. Accordingly, he submitted his joining before Medical Officer, In-charge Sunderpahari, Godda on 13.03.2012 itself, but the same was refused on the ground that the petitioner remained unauthorized absent on his previous place of posting. Aggrieved thereof, the petitioner again preferred Cont. Case (C) No. 583 of 2012, in which, the Opp. Parties submitted that the joining of the petitioner on the promoted post was accepted on 13.03.2012 itself and it is the petitioner who remained unauthorized absent after joining. Accordingly, the contempt proceeding was dropped. It has further been averred in the writ application besides filing Contempt Petition (C) NO. Case (C) No. 583 of 2012, in which, the Opp. Parties submitted that the joining of the petitioner on the promoted post was accepted on 13.03.2012 itself and it is the petitioner who remained unauthorized absent after joining. Accordingly, the contempt proceeding was dropped. It has further been averred in the writ application besides filing Contempt Petition (C) NO. 583 OF 2012, the petitioner also filed W.P. (S) No. 6817 of 2012 for acceptance of his joining dated 13.03.2012 and also for arrears of salary. The said writ petition was disposed of vide order dated 01.05.2013 in view of the assurance given by the respondents that they are ready to accept joining and pass order regarding payment of salary, provided the petitioner appears and files his claim before Director-in-Chief, Health Services, Jharkhand. Again, the petitioner filed Cont. Case (Civil) No. 546 of 2013 for non-compliance of order dated 01.05.2013 passed in W.P. (S) No. 6817 of 2012 stating that though his joining was accepted w.e.f 13.03.2012 but salary for the period 13.03.2012 to 04.07.2013 has not been paid to him. But, the Cont. Case No. 546 of 2013 stood dismissed for non-prosecution vide order dated 07.08.2015. 3. It has further been averred that pursuant to order dated 01.05.2013 passed by this Court in W.P. (S) No. 6817 of 2012, the petitioner submitted representation before the Director-in-Chief, Health Services for the salary for the period 13.03.2012 to 04.07.2013 which was rejected vide order dated 17.12.2013, which is impugned in this case. 4. Heard Mr. Keshav Kumar Sinha, the petitioner in-person and Mr. Dhananjay Kumar Dubey, learned Sr. S.C. I for the respondents. 5. The petitioner in- person submitted that it is the respondents, who accepted the joining of the petitioner submitted on 13.03.2012, vide office order dated 05.07.2013 in the light of departmental letter dated 15.02.2012 and after order being passed by this Court, hence the petitioner cannot be said to be at fault from any corner. Furthermore, at the relevant point of time, the joining of the petitioner was refused vide order dated 27.03.2012 by the competent authority and only after order 01.05.2013 passed by this Court in W.P. (S) No. 6817 of 2012 and after filing of Contempt Case (Civil) No. 546 of 2013, the joining of the petitioner was accepted. Furthermore, at the relevant point of time, the joining of the petitioner was refused vide order dated 27.03.2012 by the competent authority and only after order 01.05.2013 passed by this Court in W.P. (S) No. 6817 of 2012 and after filing of Contempt Case (Civil) No. 546 of 2013, the joining of the petitioner was accepted. It has been submitted that he was always ready and willing to serve the department but it is the respondents who at every stage created trouble. Hence, the question of ‘no work no pay’ does not arise as it is not at all fault of the petitioner rather it is the respondents who did not accept the joining of the petitioner on the promoted post. 6. Petitioner further submitted that in earlier round of litigation in W.P. (S) No. 6817 of 2012 the respondents took a stand that they do not want to contest the writ petition and they are ready to accept the joining of the petitioner and are ready to make payment of salary. Even then also they are now resiling from their own stand. 7. As against this, learned Sr. S.C. I for the State submitted that after joining on 13.03.2012, the petitioner absented himself form the duty till 04.07.2013 and did not work for the period 13.03.2012 to 04.07.2013, therefore the impugned order dated 17.12.2013 needs no interference by this Court. It has further been submitted that on the ground of ‘no work no pay’, the petitioner has rightly been denied salary for the said period. It has further been submitted that on 05.07.2013 the petitioner again submitted his joining, which was accepted w.e.f 05.07.2013. Learned counsel for the respondents further submitted that even in Cont. Case (C) No. 583 of 2012, the Court came with a finding that the petitioner has failed to satisfy that after joining on 13.03.2012, he was present on duty; hence, now nothing remains to be adjudicated in this case.. 8. Learned counsel for the respondents further submitted that even in Cont. Case (C) No. 583 of 2012, the Court came with a finding that the petitioner has failed to satisfy that after joining on 13.03.2012, he was present on duty; hence, now nothing remains to be adjudicated in this case.. 8. After bestowing my anxious consideration to the pleadings available on record, it appears that in the year 2011, petitioner seeking promotion on the post of ‘Block Extension Educator’, moved this Court by way of filing W.P. (S) No. 3852 of 2011, which was disposed of vide order dated 10.10.2011 with a direction to Director-in-Chief, Health Services, Jharkhand, Ranchi to consider the case of the petitioner for promotion on the said post from the date when his juniors have been promoted. But, only after filing of the contempt petition, the order of promotion was passed by the respondents-authorities and accordingly, the petitioner submitted his joining on 13.03.2012 but the same was not accepted. 9. Aggrieved thereof, the petitioner again filed W.P. (S) No. 6817 of 2012, which was disposed of vide order dated 01.05.2013 in view of the assurance given by the respondents. For better appreciation, the relevant portion of order dated 01.05.2013 passed in W.P. (S) No. 6817 of 2012 is reproduced herein below: “When this case is taken up today, learned J.C to G.A., appearing on behalf of the respondents, submitted that they do not want to contest the writ petition. They are ready to accept joining and pass order regarding payment of salary provided the petitioner appears and files his claim before the Director in Chief, Health Services, Jharkhand. Considering the said fair stand taken by the respondents, this writ petition is disposed of giving liberty to the petitioner to personally appear before the Director in Chief, Health Services, Jharkhand and file representation regarding his claim. The said authority, on receipt of petitioner’s representation shall consider his case and pass appropriate order particularly regarding acceptance of his joining and payment of his arrears of salary within four weeks.” (Own emphasis) 10. From perusal of record, it appears that even after undertaking given by the respondents, they did not fulfil their own promise, which compelled the petitioner to prefer contempt petition being Cont. From perusal of record, it appears that even after undertaking given by the respondents, they did not fulfil their own promise, which compelled the petitioner to prefer contempt petition being Cont. Case (Civil) No. 546 of 2013, in which, this Court took cognizance of the matter and opined that the petitioner is entitled for the salary for the period 13.03.2012 to 04.07.2013. The relevant portion of order dated 16.12.2014 is quoted herein below: “5.In the aforesaid view of the matter, I am of the opinion that once the joining of the applicant has been accepted w.e.f 13.03.2012 and he was directed by the Civil Surgeon-cum-Chief Medical Officer, Godda to gave his joining in the office of the In-charge Medical Officer, Sunderpahari, who appears to have refused to recognize the joining of the applicant w.e.f 13.03.2012, the applicant is entitled for salary between the period 13.03.2012 to 04.07.2013.” (Own emphasis) 11. However, the matter was adjourned to be listed after four weeks and when the matter was posted on 07.08.2015, the applicant in person did not appear resultantly, the contempt petition was dismissed for default; and the interim order passed by this Court could not be effected by the respondent-contemnor. 12. Under such circumstances, the petitioner again resorted to filing of present application, wherein also this Court vide order interim order dated 02.08.2016 taking every aspect of the matter, directed to file supplementary counter affidavit showing either compliance of order or satisfy this Court that the petitioner is not legally entitled to the salary for that period. For better appreciation, the relevant paragraphs of order dated 02.08.2016 is quoted herein below: “5. Even in such a case, the counter affidavit has been field denying the claim of the petitioner, by the respondent no. 3 by his order dated 17.12.2013, as contained in Annexure – B to the counter affidavit, holding that the petitioner was himself responsible for his absence form 13.3.2012 to 4.7.2013, which prima facie appears to be unfair and unfortunate. It appears that the State is behaving in the manner worse than a private respondent and is bent upon unnecessarily harassing the petitioner. 6. xxx xxxx xxx 7. It is made clear that the payment shall be made to the petitioner within four weeks from today, and if no payment is made to the petitioner during this period, the respondent no. 6. xxx xxxx xxx 7. It is made clear that the payment shall be made to the petitioner within four weeks from today, and if no payment is made to the petitioner during this period, the respondent no. 3 Director-in-Chief, Health Services, Jharkhand shall not draw his salary from the month of August, 2016 and onwards, till the further order of this Court, releasing his salary, either upon compliance of this order, or upon being satisfied on the basis of supplementary affidavit to be filed, that the petitioner is not legally entitled to the salary for that period.” (Own emphasis) 13. Pursuant thereto, the respondents did not make payment of arrears of salary for the aforesaid period but chose to file supplementary counter affidavit dated 26.09.2016. From perusal of averments made in the said affidavit, it appears that the ground taken by the respondents in denying the arrears of salary on the ground of ‘no work no pay’ is not tenable in the case at hand as from the pleadings available on record, in particular, from perusal of Annexure 9 A to the writ application it appears that the joining of the petitioner submitted on 13.03.2012 was accepted by the respondents vide order dated 05.07.2013 that too after the order being passed in writ application followed by contempt application. Hence, the petitioner cannot faulted with. 14. As a cumulative effect of the aforesaid facts and reasons as discussed in the preceding paragraphs, and judicial pronouncements, the order as contained in memo dated 17.12.2013 is hereby quashed and set aside and the respondents, in particular, respondent no. 3 is directed to make sure that payment for the intervening period i.e. from 13.03.2012 to 04.07.2013, which includes the periodical increments, be made to the petitioner within a period of eight weeks from the date of receipt/production of copy of this order. 15. With aforesaid direction, the writ petition stands allowed.