Research › Search › Judgment

Jharkhand High Court · body

2019 DIGILAW 1158 (JHR)

Shila Bose v. State of Jharkhand

2019-06-18

SANJAY KUMAR DWIVEDI

body2019
JUDGMENT : 1. Heard Miss. Piyushita, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Saket Upadhayay, learned counsel for the Respondents. 2. The petitioner has preferred this writ petition for direction to the respondents to make payment of full salary of the months of March, April and May 2010 to the petitioner allowing the basic pay of Rs. 13,630, grade pay of Rs. 42000 and accordingly the D.A and house rent allowance as admissible may also be paid for the months of March, April, May 2010 to the petitioner. 3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has been appointed on the post of Assistant Teacher in the Government Middle School Hosir Gomia. It is stated that the since the petitioner has been continuously working on the post of Assistant Teacher and he is posted in the Government Middle School Dhori. It is further stated the petitioner's basic pay in February, 2010 was Rs. 13630 and the grade pay being Rs. 42000/- in the pay scale of Rs. 9300-14800/-. It is stated that in the month of March, the petitioner's basic pay as well as grade pay lowered and the petitioner is given basic pay of Rs. 8592 and grade pay of Rs. 1761/-.She submits that all of a sudden she came to know that she was also paid less dearness allowance and house rent allowance and this would be evident on perusal of the monthly salary payment statement of the petitioner being prepared under the signature of the Headmaster, Government Middle School, Dhori on 12.6.2010. It is stated that n departmental enquiry or departmental proceeding is ending against the petitioner. It is stated that the petitioner has never given any information with regard of her pay and salary. It is stated that by order of Regional Education Officer, Bermo issue vide memo no. 53-56 dated 16.2.2010 the petitioner was deputed to the in charge duty as Invigilator in Madyamic Examination 2010 and intermediate Examination 2010 It is stated that the petitioner was relieved on 19.2.2010 for doing invigilation duty on deputation. 4. It is stated that by order of Regional Education Officer, Bermo issue vide memo no. 53-56 dated 16.2.2010 the petitioner was deputed to the in charge duty as Invigilator in Madyamic Examination 2010 and intermediate Examination 2010 It is stated that the petitioner was relieved on 19.2.2010 for doing invigilation duty on deputation. 4. On the other hand, the learned counsel for the State has argued that in spite of repeated reminder the petitioner did not take pain to file her show cause for her illegal absence and overstay thus keeping in view of the principle of “No Work No Pay” her salary was paid by deducting the relevant period of illegal absence I.e 19.3.2010 and 31.3.2010. Similarly the petitioner filed an application for compensatory leave for 23.4.2010 and 24.4.2010 and availed continuous summer vacation upto 11.5.2010 but failed to eradicate/solve the problem crept due to her undisciplined and whimsical act as such her salary for the relevant period is deducted to “No Work No Pay” 5. In view of the submission of the learned counsel for the State, this court finds that allegation of fabrication of the relieve letter is serious in nature and authority have taken lenient view by way of deducting the pay for the period which she worked. As such no case is made out for interference with the writ petition. It is accordingly dismissed.