In Brief
A junior high school teacher in Allahabad absented herself from duty for nearly nine years starting August 2001. After initially being denied reinstatement, she was reinstated by the High Court in 2010 but worked for only 36 days before retiring. The High Court ordered the employer to pay her salary for the entire absence period. The Supreme Court reversed this, holding that the 'no work, no pay' principle applies to unauthorized absences, and the employer's denial of salary for the absence period was justified. The Court found that paying nearly ten years' salary for only 36 days of actual work was unsustainable and erroneous.
The lawyer headnote and full judgment text are available to registered users.