# Shanker v. State of U.P. and others - **Citation:** (2001) 2 ILRA 111 - **Court:** High Court of Judicature at Allahabad - **Decided:** 2001-01-04 - **Source:** https://unisonlegal.in/judgment/allahabad-high-court/shanker-v-state-of-u-p-and-others-39761 - **Pages:** 4 ## Text INDIAN LAW REPORTS ALLAHABAD SERIES [2001 111 doubt the said officer carried has been fully explained or finally decided by the respondents. 12. Apart from what has been stated above, the case can be considered from another aspect. Once the authority has noted in its report that the appointment of petitioner is approved, the fact that the petitioner was not paid salary under Payment of Salaries Act is not significant. Payment may be made by Committee of Management from its own recourses and if salary is not paid teacher cannot be penalised for working without salary though unlawfully withheld. 13. In view of the above, the impugned order dated 25.3.98 (Annexure 4 to the petition) is quashed to the extent it refers and relates to the petitioner. The petition stands allowed. Consequently, the petitioner is entitled to receive salary along with other approved staff and teachers. No order as to costs. 25,*,1$/ -85,6',&7,21 25,*,1$/ -85,6',&7,21 &5,0,1$/ 6,'( &5,0,1$/ 6,'( '$7(' $//$+$%$' '$7(' $//$+$%$' %()25( %()25( 7+( +21·%/( 0 .$7-8 - 7+( +21·%/( 0 .$7-8 - 7+( +21·%/( 21.$5(6+:$5 %+$77 - 7+( +21·%/( 21.$5(6+:$5 %+$77 - &ULPLQDO 0LVF :ULW 3HWLWLRQ 1R RI 6KDQNHU «3HWLWLRQHU 9HUVXV 6WDWH RI 83 DQG RWKHUV «5HVSRQGHQWV &RXQVHO IRU WKH 3HWLWLRQHU 6KUL $GLW\D .XPDU