Services Utilised For Long Period Cannot Go Unpaid Merely Due To Absence Of Sanctioned Post: Gauhati High Court
The Gauhati High Court has held that where services of an employee are continuously utilised for a long period, payment cannot be denied merely because there was no sanctioned post and such non-payment would be unconstitutional and violative of fundamental rights.The court was hearing a school employee's plea who continued working in a Grade-IV post for nearly 35 years without a sanctioned...
The Gauhati High Court has held that where services of an employee are continuously utilised for a long period, payment cannot be denied merely because there was no sanctioned post and such non-payment would be unconstitutional and violative of fundamental rights.
The court was hearing a school employee's plea who continued working in a Grade-IV post for nearly 35 years without a sanctioned post and was denied salary after 2005.
Justice Shamima Jahan, presiding over the case, observed, “It is no longer res integra that if a service is utilized by the authority concerned even without a sanctioned post, the basic salary, i.e., the payment has to be made to the employee concerned. Non-payment is considered to be unconstitutional and in violation of the fundamental rights, particularly, if the employee is made to work for a long period of time.”
Justice Jahan stated, “In the instant case, the petitioner has worked for almost 35 years in service to the school. As such, his payment cannot be denied.”
The petitioner had approached the High Court seeking a direction to the Director of Secondary Education, Assam, to sanction a Grade-IV post and/or hold a selection process to accommodate him. According to the petitioner, he was initially appointed temporarily in a Grade-IV post in Paschim Bonbhag High School against a leave vacancy with effect from 1991, and his appointment was extended from time to time. Later, the school authorities resolved to seek sanction of another Grade-IV post and subsequently appointed him against an honorary post.
The petitioner stated that he was initially appointed temporarily in a Grade-IV post in Paschim Bonbhag High School against a leave vacancy in 1991 and his appointment was extended from time to time. Thereafter, the school authorities appointed him against an honorary post and also sought sanction of an additional Grade-IV post. The petitioner stated that he received salary against leave vacancies till 2002 and thereafter against a retired vacancy till 2005, but after 2005, salary was stopped.
Before the Court, the petitioner contended that though his appointment may be termed irregular, it was not illegal since his services had continuously been utilised by the school.
The State submitted that accommodation against a Grade-IV post could only be through a valid selection process, while the school authorities argued that the petitioner had not been appointed against any sanctioned post.
The Court noted, “petitioner has been temporarily appointed in the year 1991 and his services were utilized in a Grade-IV post till date and the petitioner is stated to have been working till December 2025, as a Grade-IV employee. It is the case of the petitioner that since January,, 2026, he is working in the same school as a Cook for the Mid-Day Meal provided to the students.”
Observing that the petitioner “had never left the school and that he had offered his service for the smooth running of the same,” the Court held that his case deserved consideration.
The Court further observed that “the petitioner having worked since long in a Grade-IV post, a legitimate expectation is built up in respect of the petitioner.”
Accordingly, the Court directed the authorities in the Secondary Education Department to consider the petitioner's case afresh upon submission of a representation along with a certified copy of the order within one month.
Case Number: WP(C)/142/2024
Case Name: Pabindra Kumar Das v. State of Assam & Ors.