Ruling on receiving a secondment allowance without going to the place of secondment

Question:
Another person asks and says: I am an employee, and the department I work for agrees to second individuals for different periods, without the seconded individual going to perform any task. The officials know this and consider this secondment allowance to be an encouragement for the individual, a reward, and an encouragement for the work he does. The question is: Is this amount I receive as a secondment allowance lawful or forbidden?

Answer:
It is known that this is not permissible, as he is recorded as being seconded, but he is not seconded and remains in his work... and does not travel. It is known that this is a ruse, a lie, and a deception of the state, so it is forbidden; because this is an injustice without right.
However, if the state has been informed of this and has authorized the officials to do this for their employees, and that this is for something the state agreed upon with the directors, or with the ministers; then there is nothing wrong with this; because the state sees the public benefit. If it sees that it should second some people in reality, and give the reward to the seconded person; to encourage him in his work, as the seconded person is given what is given to help him in his work, and he does not find fatigue in the interview, and his separation from his family, and the like, if the state sees that for the sake of pleasing the hearts of the residents, and their activity in work, and encouraging them in work, this is a matter for it.
As for the employee whose superior deceives the state, and deceives the state, and gives him something that has no reality, the most apparent from the principles: that this is usury or interest, and it is not permissible, it is forbidden.