Bombay HC: No work no wages” cannot be made applicable in such extraordinary circumstances

This Court cannot turn a Nelson's eye to an extraordinary

situation on account of Corona virus/ COVID19

pandemic. Able bodied

persons, who are willing and desirous to offer their services in deference

to their deployment as contract labourers in the security and house

keeping sector of the Trust, are unable to work since the temples and

places of worships in the entire nation have been closed for securing the

containment of COVID19

pandemic. Even the principal employer is

unable to allot the work to such employees in such situation. Prima facie,

I feel that the principle of “no workno

wages” cannot be made applicable

in such extraordinary circumstances. The Court cannot be insensitive to

the plight of such workers, which has unfortunately befallen them on

account of the Covid19

pandemic.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

BENCH AT AURANGABAD

WRIT PETITION NO.4013 OF 2020

RASHTRIYA SHRAMIK AGHADI. Vs THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND OTHERS

CORAM: RAVINDRA V. GHUGE, J.

DATE :12th  May, 2020

Print Page

When principle of no work,no pay will not be applicable when retrospective promotion is given?

The respondents have advanced the argument that
the denial of pay and allowances is on the principle of “no
work no pay” and no injustice has been done to the appellant
since he has not actually worked in the promotional post of
Naib Subedar during the aforesaid period. It was submitted
that the benefit of pay and allowances was rightly awarded
w.e.f. 13.11.2000, the date on which the appellant actually
assumed the rank of Naib Subedar but his seniority was
maintained so as to protect his interest in his further
promotions.
12. In normal circumstances when retrospective
promotions are effected, all benefits flowing therefrom,
including monetary benefits, must be extended to an
employee who has been denied promotion earlier. So far as
monetary benefits with regard to retrospective promotion is
concerned that depends upon case to case. In State of
Kerala & Ors. vs. E.K. Bhaskaran Pillai, (2007) 6 SCC 524,
this Court held that the principle of “no work no pay” cannot

be accepted as a rule of thumb and the matter will have to be
considered on a case to case basis and in para (4), it was
held as under:-
“… We have considered the decisions cited on behalf of both the
sides. So far as the situation with regard to monetary benefits
with retrospective promotion is concerned, that depends upon
case to case. There are various facets which have to be
considered. Sometimes in a case of departmental enquiry or in
criminal case it depends on the authorities to grant full back
wages or 50 per cent of back wages looking to the nature of
delinquency involved in the matter or in criminal cases where
the incumbent has been acquitted by giving benefit of doubt or
full acquittal. Sometimes in the matter when the person is
superseded and he has challenged the same before court or
tribunal and he succeeds in that and direction is given for
reconsideration of his case from the date persons junior to him
were appointed, in that case the court may grant sometimes full
benefits with retrospective effect and sometimes it may not.
Particularly when the administration has wrongly denied his due
then in that case he should be given full benefits including
monetary benefit subject to there being any change in law or
some other supervening factors. However, it is very difficult to
set down any hard-and-fast rule. The principle “no work no pay”
cannot be accepted as a rule of thumb. There are exceptions
where courts have granted monetary benefits also.”
REPORTABLE
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CIVIL APPEAL NO. 811 OF 2007
RAMESH KUMAR ...Appellant
Versus
UNION OF INDIA & ORS. ...Respondents
Citation;AIR 2015 SC 2904
 R. BANUMATHI, J.

Print Page