Key Ruling On Right To Wages
The Allahabad High Court has ruled that an employee confined in jail for nearly three years is not entitled to back wages for that period. The Court upheld the “no work, no pay” principle. It stated that absence due to imprisonment does not create a right to wages.
Case Background
The petitioner, a government employee, was jailed from January 23, 2015, to December 18, 2018. This was after an FIR was lodged under Section 13(1)(b) read with Section 13(1) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988. They were accused for allegedly taking bribes for electricity connections.
After his release, he approached authorities seeking wages for the period of his imprisonment. But, his request was rejected based on the “no work, no pay” principle. The petitioner then challenged this decision in the Allahabad High Court.
Court’s Observations
Justice Ajay Bhanot ruled that the “no work, no pay” principle can only be relaxed in exceptional circumstances. Such as, when the employer prevents the employee from working. However, in this case, the absence was due to the petitioner’s own criminal case.
The Court relied on two Supreme Court precedents:
- Reserve Bank of India v. Bhopal Singh Panchal. The Supreme Court held that if an employee is absent due to misconduct, the employer is not responsible for paying wages.
- Ranchhodji Chaturji Thakore v. Gujarat Electricity Board. The Court ruled that if an employee is jailed and later acquitted, the employer still cannot be forced to pay back wages. Unless the absence was due to an unjust disciplinary inquiry.
The Court emphasized that granting back wages in this case would amount to “unjust enrichment” for the petitioner. It is unfair loss to the State exchequer.
Final Verdict Regarding Right To Wages
Dismissing the petition, the Court ruled that the petitioner had no legal entitlement to wages for the period of imprisonment. They upheld the rejection of his claim by the authorities.
