"Toil Without Wages Strikes At The Very Heart Of Human Dignity" : Karnataka High Court Directs State To Release 19-Month Unpaid Salaries To Government-Aided School Teachers
Safiya Malik
The High Court of Karnataka at Dharwad, Single Bench of Justice M. Nagaprasanna allowed a petition filed by four teachers of a government-aided school challenging the non-payment of their salaries for a continuous period of 19 months and directed the State authorities to disburse all pending wages within a fixed timeframe, with consequences in costs for any default in compliance. In a case concerning government teachers made to work without remuneration, the Court observed that requiring teachers, or any employee, to serve without pay offends human dignity and amounts to forced labour barred by Article 23 of the Constitution of India.
The writ petition concerns the non-payment of monthly salaries to teachers employed in a grant-in-aid school administered by Shri Deshbhushan High School, Kothali Kuppanwadi, Taluk Chikkodi, District Belagavi, under the supervision of the State Government’s Department of Education. On 29.09.2022, Additional Commissioner, Department of Education, Dharwad granted permission to fill vacant posts in the institution. A recruitment process followed, culminating in the issuance of appointment orders dated 24.03.2023 with concurrence of the Government. The petitioners began working continuously in the institution and their salaries were fixed.
On 16.05.2024, the State withheld the payment of salaries without issuing prior notice or challenging the appointment itself. The petitioners first questioned the withholding of salaries, later a show-cause notice proposing cancellation of appointments, and then cancellation orders issued by The Additional Commissioner, Department of Education. In each of these proceedings, interim protections were granted by coordinate benches. The appellate authority under Section 131 of the Karnataka Education Act, 1983 set aside the cancellation and remanded the matter, following which another cancellation order was issued.
The core dispute in the present writ petition is that despite uninterrupted service from May 2024 onward, no salary was paid for nearly nineteen months. The petitioners placed on record muster rolls reflecting daily attendance and representations submitted to the authorities for salary release. The State defended the withholding of salaries on the basis of pending proceedings but did not dispute that the petitioners continued to work in the institution and that no salary was paid. The petition seeks mandamus for release of salary arrears, arguing unlawful withholding despite continuous service.
The Court observed that when the sequence of events is viewed in its proper order, “one truth shines with unmistakable clarity: the petitioners, having discharging their duties without any break since, 2023 and have not been paid a single rupee of salary from May, 2024 till this date, a period spanning nearly 19 months.” It recorded that “these teachers have been compelled to render services in the fifth respondent – School without any remuneration whatsoever from the said date.” The Court noted that the obligation to pay salary lies with the State and called it “a matter beyond contest.”
Referring to Article 23 of the Constitution, the Bench stated that its mandate proscribes “begar and other similar forms of forced labour.” It quoted that “to force these teachers or indeed any employee, to toil without wages strikes at the very heart of human dignity and stands in stark violation of Article 23 of the Constitution of India.” It further observed that the State’s justification based on pendency of proceedings is “wholly untenable and bereft of any legal justification.”
The Court extracted portions of the judgment in People’s Union for Democratic Rights v. Union of India explaining that “‘begar’ may therefore be loosely described as labour or service which a person is forced to give without receiving any remuneration for it.” It continued quoting that “this Article strikes at forced labour in whatever form it may manifest itself, because it is violative of human dignity and is contrary to basic human values.” The Bench referred to the principle that Article 23 protects individuals against both the State and private entities, noting that the prohibition applies “wherever they are found.”
Applying the constitutional position to the present case, the Court stated that “the State has practised begar by non-payment of salary to these petitioners for over 19 months, as the teachers have been made to work without salary.” It held that service rendered without payment constitutes “the yoke of unpaid labour.” With respect to the conduct of the authorities, the Court recorded that the petitioners were “compelled to knock at the doors of this Court repeatedly owing to unlawful actions of the second respondent.” It declined to impose exemplary costs but recorded the entitlement of the petitioners to litigation costs in the event of non-payment.
The Court allowed the writ petition. It directed that “Mandamus issues to the second respondent to release the salaries of the petitioners from May, 2024 to till this date, on or before 04.12.2025. In the event, the salaries are not released on or before 04.12.2025, the petitioners become entitled to cost of litigation at Rs.25,000/- each. The memo of calculation before this Court depicts that the salaries of Rs.12,44,386/- each is due to be paid to these petitioners, from May, 2024 till this date.”
Advocates Representing The Parties
For the Petitioners: Smt. Vaibhavi Inamadar, Advocate
For the Respondents: Smt. Girija S. Hiremath, HCGP; Shri. Kishor S. Sutar.
Case Title: ANIL S/O. MALLAPPA KANAWADE & Others AND THE STATE OF KARNATAKA & Others
Neutral Citation: 2025: KHC-D:15969
Case Number: Writ Petition No. 104367 of 2025
Bench: Justice M. Nagaprasanna
