As per case facts, the Petitioner was transferred but did not join his new posting, opting instead to challenge the transfer order. Though the transfer order was later cancelled, he ... remained absent during the interim period. He sought salary and allowances for this period, but the Grievance Redressal Committee (GRC) denied his claim, treating the absence as 'dies non' or unauthorized. The question arose whether the Petitioner was legally entitled to salary and allowances for this period, considering the transfer order's eventual cancellation and whether his absence should be classified as 'dies non' or 'joining time' under relevant regulations. Finally, the Court ruled that an employee absent without authority is not entitled to pay and allowances. It was held that the Petitioner's failure to join the transferred post, even while challenging the order, amounted to unauthorized absence. The 'no work, no pay' principle was applicable, confirming that the period was rightly treated as 'dies non'. Therefore, the Petitioner was not entitled to salary and allowances for that duration, upholding the GRC's decision and dismissing his petition.