Inadmissibility of unlegislated exclusions through office memorandums

It is a well-settled principle of statutory construction that the legislature never wastes its words and that every part of a statute must be given its full operational effect. When the text of Section 59(2) expressly confines exclusions to bonus and overtime wages, the executive branch cannot introduce additional exclusions like house rent allowance or transport allowance through internal office memorandums. The doctrine of expression unius est exclusio alterius dictates that the explicit mention of specific exclusions implies the deliberate exclusion of any other unmentioned items. Introducing new exceptions via administrative notifications violates the fundamental boundaries separating legislative policy-making from executive implementation. For a considerable duration, public sector employees successfully received overtime allowances calculated by incorporating these standard compensatory elements without administrative disruption. The sudden issuance of restrictive office memorandums lacked substantive legal authority and represented an impermissible attempt to alter settled statutory entitlements. Administrative convenience or financial burden on the state cannot serve as a valid legal justification for rewriting clear legislative enactments. Courts must resolutely reject such administrative overreach to preserve the integrity of statutory rights. (Union of India & Others v. Heavy Vehicles Factory Employees' Union and Another | 2026 INSC 74)