Yesterday, the Central Administrative Tribunal (CAT) in Srinagar reaffirmed that an employee’s right to a salary extends to their family.
In addressing the appeal of Ghulam Nabi Bhat, an assistant in the Forest Department, who is upset about his unpaid regular salary attached to the post, a division bench made up of M S Latif, Member (J), and Prasant Kumar, Member (A) stated, “True it is that salary is the right of employees but at the same time, it is the right of their children and family as well, as the bread and butter of the family is dependent on the earnings of the employee.”
A government order dated September 22, 2023, regularized Bhat’s services as an assistant under SRO 64 of 1994. The order was issued in accordance with the ruling made in LPA No 112 of 2020.
The petitioner’s grievance is that despite his services having been regularised, his legitimate due salary has been unpaid for the past six months.
He claimed that he was starving, as was his family, and that they were forced to lead an animalistic life.
The tribunal declared, “It is a beaten law that once a person is working he has to be paid his legitimate salary.”
A compliance affidavit supported by an affidavit signed by T Rabi Kumar, IFS presently posted as APCCF Kashmir indicated that a case was registered by the Crime Branch, Kashmir, against the petitioner and a report was still awaited from CID.
In response to this, senior counsel B A Bashir said: “Even if an FIR has been registered, does it mean that the petitioner will be deprived of his legitimately earned due salary once he has been rightly appointed by the competent authority.”
The senior counsel further referred to some communication between the CID and the Forest Department and sought time to place them on record.
“Prayer is allowed,” the court said.
Bikram Deep Singh on behalf of the government submitted that during the pendency of the petition, the respondents had released the wages of the petitioner and to this effect, he placed on record a wage bill report wherein an amount of Rs 55,669 had been credited to the account of the petitioner.
In counter, counsel for the petitioner submitted that the wage bill report as submitted by the respondents was itself in violation of the orders passed by the Division Bench of the High Court of Jammu and Kashmir.
After hearing the parties, the court asked Bikram Deep Singh to submit a fresh supplementary affidavit, clarifying his position in the light of the documents which the senior counsel Bashir would like to place on record.
The court listed the matter for further hearing on April 3.
 in Srinagar yesterday reiterated that salary was not only the right of an employee but also their family’s right.){kind=link}