Madhya Pradesh High CourtEmployment and Labour LawAdministrative and Public Law

MP HC Quashes Gram Rozgar Sahayak’s 30-Day Salary Cut, Says No Notice Covered The Alleged April 2025 Absence

Rohit Goswamiv.State Of M.P.

MP HC Quashes Gram Rozgar Sahayak’s 30-Day Salary Cut, Says No Notice Covered The Alleged April 2025 Absence. Rohit Goswami vs State Of M.P.. Madhya Pradesh High Court. LawLens
The LawLens card for this judgmentXLinkedInWhatsApp

In brief

The question

Whether the salary deduction for April 2025 was made in violation of the principles of natural justice, given the petitioner’s alleged unauthorised absence and non-implementation of schemes.

The court held

The Court quashed the order dated 7 May 2025 insofar as it concerned the petitioner.

It also directed

It permitted the respondents to take appropriate action after following the procedure in the policy and the principles of natural justice.

It also directed the respondents to examine the petitioner’s claim for unpaid salary after April 2025 and, if his service had not been discontinued, ensure payment according to his entitlement.

The petition was disposed of.

01Facts

The petitioner, a Gram Rozgar Sahayak posted at Gram Panchayat Durjanpura, challenged an order dated 7 May 2025 deducting his salary for April 2025 on a “no work no pay” basis.

¶ 1–7

He alleged that inadequate infrastructure prevented him from properly implementing government schemes and that he had received no opportunity to respond before the deduction.

¶ 1–7

The State relied on earlier show-cause notices concerning absence in September 2024 and on notices and communications issued after the impugned order.

¶ 1–7

The petitioner also stated that salary had not been paid after April 2025.

¶ 11

02Issues

i.Whether the salary deduction for April 2025 was made in violation of the principles of natural justice, given the petitioner’s alleged unauthorised absence and non-implementation of schemes.

¶ 3–5, 8–9

ii.Whether the respondents were required to follow the applicable procedure before taking disciplinary action against the petitioner.

¶ 9–10, 12

03Law Applied

The Court applied the principles of natural justice, holding that where an order imposes financial loss and is stigmatic—by attributing unauthorised absence or misconduct—the affected employee must be given a proper opportunity to respond before the order is made.

¶ 8–9

It also referred to the Madhya Pradesh Rajya Rojgar Guarantee Parishad policy dated 24 June 2025, which provides a procedure for disciplinary action against Gram Rozgar Sahayaks.

¶ 8–9

04Reasoning

The impugned order stated that the petitioner had remained unauthorisedly absent and deducted his salary for April 2025, making it stigmatic and financially adverse.

¶ 8–9

The two notices relied on by the State predated the relevant salary period and concerned earlier alleged absence; the other notices were issued after the impugned order.

¶ 8–9

The Court therefore found that no notice had been given to the petitioner to explain the alleged absence or non-implementation of schemes during April 2025.

¶ 8–9

In those circumstances, the deduction was made in breach of natural justice and without following the applicable procedure.

¶ 8–9

05Holding

The Court quashed the order dated 7 May 2025 insofar as it concerned the petitioner.

¶ 10–12

It permitted the respondents to take appropriate action after following the procedure in the policy and the principles of natural justice.

¶ 10–12

It also directed the respondents to examine the petitioner’s claim for unpaid salary after April 2025 and, if his service had not been discontinued, ensure payment according to his entitlement.

¶ 10–12

The petition was disposed of.

¶ 10–12
Madhya Pradesh High Court

Original Court PDF

Rohit GoswamivsState Of M.P.

Madhya Pradesh High Court · October 27, 2026

Click to open original judgment

Original judgment, available to read, download and summarize on LawLens.in

Click to open original judgment