STATE OF BIHAR AND OTHERS versus KRIPA NANO SINGH AND ANOTHER

Citation: [2014] 8 S.C.R. 305 · Decided: 23-07-2014 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: MADAN B. LOKUR · Disposal: Appeal(s) allowed

Judgment (excerpt)

[2014) 8 S.C.R. 305 
STATE OF BIHAR AND OTHERS 
v. 
KRIPA NANO SINGH AND ANOTHER 
(Civil Appeal No. 6692 of 2014) 
JULY 23, 2014 
[MADAN B. LOKUR AND KURIAN JOSEPH, JJ.) 
Service Law: 
A 
B 
'No work, no pay' - Appointment - Appointee not able to c 
join as per appointment letter, since he was not permitted to 
join - Appointee did not bring this fact to the notice of higher 
authorities - After five years joined the duty - After 10 years 
of service, approached the Court seeking payment of salary 
for the period, he had not worked - Courts below granted the 
0 
claim - On appeal, held: 'No work, no pay' is the rule and 'no 
work, yet pay' is the exception - Compulsory waiting period 
comes under exception, if the claimant establishes that 
despite earnest endeavours, he was not able to join the duty 
- Voluntary waiting period is not covered by exception - In the 
E 
present case, the claimant failed to show that he made 
earnest endeavour to join the duty, once he was refused to 
join the duty - Hence, the period from the date of refusal to 
join, till the date of his joining the duty, cannot be said to be 
compulsory waiting period - Hence the appointee not entitled 
for the salary for that period. 
F 
Respondent was appointed as a teacher of Political 
Science. He was asked to report to a particular school for 
joining the duty within a period of 21 days from the date 
of appointment letter i.e. 5.2.1986. The respondent G 
reported for the duty within stipulated time i.e. on 
24.2.1986, but was not allowed to join, on the ground that 
there already existed the teacher for political science. He 
joined duty after five years on 17.2.1991 after receiving a 
305 
H 
306 
SUPREME COURT REPORTS 
[2014] 8 S.C.R. 
A letter from the Department. After ten years of his joining 
the duty, he filed writ petition claiming salary for the 
period from 24.2.1986to16.7.1991. The claim was allowed 
by courts below. Hence the present appeal by the State. 
B 
Allowing the appeal, the Court 
HELD: 1. 'No work, no pay', is the rule and 'no work, 
yet pay', is the exception. Compulsory waiting period is 
one such exception. But to qualify for the exception, an 
employee has to establish that he had made earnest 
C . endeavors and yet that he was not able to join duty for 
no fault on his part. He must also show his earnestness 
to join duty. Voluntary waiting period is not covered by 
the exception. [Para 2] [307-F] 
0 
2. It is not a case of transfer as wrongly noted by the 
Division Bench. It is a case of first appointment. The first 
respondent had not joined duty in the school as per the 
letter of appointment. True, the Headmaster of the school 
had not accepted the joining but the first respondent had 
E necessarily to bring the matter to the higher authorities 
since he was to join duty as per his order of appointment 
within 21 days of the issuance of the appointment letter 
dated 05.02.1986. There is no whisper either in the writ 
petitions or in the counter affidavit before this Court that 
the first respondent made any serious attempt before any 
F authority seeking permission to join duty in any other 
school. It becomes difficult to believe that for five years, 
he was waiting for an order to join duty in school where 
there is vacancy. In case, the appointee could not join 
duty in the first place of posting, he should have brought 
G the matter to the notice of the higher authorities and 
sought for a posting in any other place, so as to save his 
appointment. Nothing of that sort was done by the first 
respondent. He waited till 1991 till he got a Memo dated 
17.07.1991. [Para 8] [309-E-H; 310-A-B] 
H 
STATE OF BIHAR v. KRIPA NANO SINGH 
307 
2. The conduct of the respondent shows that he was 
A 
at fault. He waited for five years to get another posting. 
He had not made any representation during the said 
period for joining duty in any other place. His writ petition 
itself is after ten years of his joining duty at a place 
apparently of his choice. Though the order is dated 
B 
05.02.1986, he had joined duty only on 17.07.1991. In such 
circumstances, it cannot be said that the period between 
24.02.1986 to 16.07.1991 is to be treated as a compulsory 
waiting period. It is in fact a voluntary waiting period. 
[Para 9] [310-E-G] 
c 
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION : Civil Appeal No. 
6692 of 2014 
From the Judgment and Order dated 14.09.2009 in LPA 
No. 1061/2009 of the High Court of Patna. 
Gopal Singh and Manish Kumar fr

Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.