Facts of the Case

This case involves the State Excise Department (which regulates liquor licences), not GST — the reference to "GST Office" in the second respondent's address is incidental to the department's premises, not the subject of the dispute. Madan Lal Dhruw, a Constable in the Excise Department, filed WPS No. 2938 of 2022 before the High Court of Chhattisgarh at Bilaspur, challenging an order dated 26.11.2021 passed by the Deputy Commissioner (Excise), Raipur. That order treated his period in judicial custody — from 24.01.2018 to 14.06.2021, about three years four months — as "no work no pay," with the remaining period treated as on duty for all purposes. The petitioner had been arrested after an FIR under Sections 302, 201 and 120(B)/34 IPC (murder and related offences), and was in custody for that period before securing bail/relief.

Issues Involved

  1. Whether the Deputy Commissioner (Excise) was required to issue a fresh show-cause notice and comply with natural justice before treating the custody period as "no work no pay," given that the underlying facts (dates of custody) were undisputed.

Petitioner's Arguments

  • The petitioner argued that the principles of natural justice required a show-cause notice before passing an adverse order on his pay for the custody period, relying on precedent regarding disciplinary action against government employees.

Respondent's Arguments

  • The State argued that the precedent relied upon by the petitioner did not apply because the facts — the exact dates and duration of his judicial custody — were not in dispute, unlike cases requiring fact-finding through a show-cause process.

Court Order / Findings

  • Justice Narendra Kumar Vyas held that where the underlying facts (duration of custody) are undisputed, issuing a show-cause notice is a mere formality that does not need to be insisted upon.
  • The Court found the impugned order dated 26.11.2021 was a detailed order and that the petitioner failed to show any perversity or illegality in it.
  • The writ petition was dismissed.

Important Clarification

This ruling offers no guidance on GST law — it is a service-law decision about salary treatment during a period of judicial custody for a government (State Excise Department) employee. The only useful general principle is that natural justice requirements can be relaxed where the core facts triggering an adverse consequence are themselves undisputed.

Sections Involved

  • Indian Penal Code, 1860 — Sections 302, 201, 120(B)/34 (the underlying criminal case).
  • Service rules governing pay during suspension/custody for State Excise Department employees (not GST law).

Decision – In Favour of

Decided against the petitioner; the writ petition was dismissed and the "no work no pay" treatment of his custody period was upheld.

Case Details

Court: High Court of Chhattisgarh, Bilaspur
Case No.: WPS No. 2938 of 2022
Coram: Justice Narendra Kumar Vyas
Date: 29.08.2023
Parties: Madan Lal Dhruw vs. State of Chhattisgarh & Others

Link to Download the Order

Click here to view/download the full order

Disclaimer

This content is shared strictly for general information and knowledge purposes only. Readers should independently verify the information from reliable sources. It is not intended to provide legal, professional, or advisory guidance. The author and the organisation disclaim all liability arising from the use of this content. The material has been prepared with the assistance of AI tools.