1 2026:CGHC:16837 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPS No. 5665 of 2021  Dhanau Ram Purena S/o Shri Mansingh Purena Aged About 54 Years Working As Assistant Internal Audit And Taxation Officer, At Janpad Panchayat Abhanpur, District Raipur Chhattisgarh., District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh ... Petitioner(s) versus 1. State Of Chhattisgarh Through Secretary, Department Of Panchayat And Rural Development, Mahanadi Bhawan, Mantralaya New Raipur, District Raipur Chhattisgarh., District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh 2. Joint Director Directorate Of Chhattisgarh Panchayat Raipur, Second Floor, Indravati Bhawan, Naya Raipur, District Raipur Chhattisgarh., District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh 3. Collector Raipur, District Raipur Chhattisgarh., District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh 4. Chief Executive Officer Zila Panchayat Raipur, District Raipur Chhattisgarh., District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh 5. Chief Executive Officer Janpad Panchayat Abhanpur, District Raipur Chhattisgarh., District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh ... Respondent(s) For Petitioner : Mr. B.L. Sahu, Advocate For State : Mr. R.C.S. Deo, P.L. Hon’ble Shri Justice Rakesh Mohan Pandey Order On Board 2 13.4.2026 1) Petitioner has filed this petition seeking following reliefs:- (i) That, this Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to quash impugned letter dated 17.9.2021 (Annexure P/1) issued by the respondent No. 2 in the interest of justice. (ii) That, this Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to strictly direction to the respondent authorities to grant arrears of the petitioner’s salary during from 21.12.2011 from 20.9.2012 with 18% interest within stipulated time as per law, in the interest of justice. (iii) Any other relief which may be suitable in the facts and circumstances of the case, may also be granted. 2) Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that offence punishable u/s 420/34, 467, 468, 471, 201, 418, 409 and 34 of IPC was registered against petitioner who was working on the post of Assistant Internal Audit & Taxation Officer at Janpad Panchayat, Abhanpur, District Raipur. He further submits that petitioner was in judicial custody from 21.12.2011 to 20.9.2012 ; during that period, petitioner was absent from duty and subsequently, he was enlarged on bail and he resumed his services but salary of that period was not paid. He contends that petitioner preferred WPS No. 2167 of 2021 which was disposed directing respondent authorities to consider the representation of petitioner. He further contends that Joint Director Directorate Of Panchayat vide order dated 17.9.2021 has rejected the representation made by petitioner and designated the period from 21.12.2011 to 20.9.2012 3 as non-working days applying principle of “no-work-no-pay”. He prays to quash the order dated 17.9.2021. 3) On the other hand, learned State counsel would oppose. 4) I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the documents placed on record. 5) It is not in dispute that petitioner remained in judicial custody from 21.12.2011 to 20.9.2012 and department took decision of declaring the said period as non-working days by applying principle of “no-work-no-pay”. However, petitioner failed to substantiate his claim placing reliance on circular(s)/ service rule(s) in order to claim salary for the said period, therefore in my opinion, no case is made out for interference and this petition stands dismissed. 6) However, petitioner would be at liberty to avail the remedy available under the law. Sd/- (Rakesh Mohan Pandey) JUDGE A j i n k y a Digitally signed by AJINKYA PANSARE Date: 2026.04.15 10:42:04 +0530