In this post we will discuss about a writ petition in which the Assistant Commissioner for State Taxes & Excise Sumedha Bhatti demanded that the court order the state government to pay her salary for January and February 2019 and from August 2019 to the date on which she earned her leave for the period of ex post facto.

Government employee Salary Case
Government employee Salary Case

Introduction

Public servants must operate strictly within the four corners of the law and all their operations are regulated by the laws, regulations and instructions of the High Court of Himachal Pradesh.

Facts of the case

Each employee must be respectful and disciplined towards his employer, which the petitioner has failed to do, HC said. In the writ petition, the Assistant Commissioner for State Taxes & Excise Sumedha Bhatti demanded that the court order the state government to pay her salary for January and February 2019 and from August 2019 to the date on which she earned her leave for the period of ex post facto.

ALSO READ- RECOVER YOUR SALARY THROUGH NCLT CHANDIGARH

Legal Standpoint

Division of Justice Tarlok Singh Chauhan and Justice Jyotsna Rewal Dua observed in Thursday’s judgment that there is no doubt that the petitioner seems to be riding high on the fuel of power and has failed to understand that his office is sacrosanct and intended for use and not for misuse and, in the event that the petitioner is spoiling the laws, then the law is not helpless and will be steadfast.

The court said that a complainant who is a government servant cannot behave as a private citizen who is free to act in a manner. HC argued that it did so because the petitioner was educated and employed at a high level, and thus knew well that leave could not be asserted as a right and, in the present case, much less in the manner stated by the petitioner. “As an obedient government servant, the petitioner would have applied for leave in compliance with the law and only then gone on leave,” he said.

ALSO READ- LABOUR COURT CASE WRONGFUL TERMINATION G4 SECURITY SERVICES

Conclusion

Although rejecting a petition filed by the Assistant Commissioner for State Taxes & Excise, the court said that discipline is the hallmark of any employee and, in the event that the employee is not prepared to subject himself or herself to discipline, it is evident that these employees would not only call for the wrath of their employer but will also be liable to prosecution, at least on a departmental basis.

This post was written by Kasha Doshi.

For case specific advice, get in touch with best/top expert Service Lawyer advocate lawyer in Chandigarh Panchkula Mohali.

For more info, dial 99888-17966.