BALBIR SINGH NEG! v. UNION OF INDIA & Ors.
Case at a glance
Outcome
Dismissed
Under these· circumstances, the petition is dismissed:
Judgment
Operative part
relationship or master and servanrbecomes oper.ative, i.e., July 1, 199i. A .. Acceptance of his ~esignation before that date, i.~., 30.6'.1991 is not valid in law. Under Rule 48-A of the Pension Rules, a.Government servant, on completion of required pe~iod of service, -is ~ntitie·d to 'make a request for. voluntary retirement. Admittedly, that request was acceded to and resig natiop was accepted. Learned counsel for the Petitioner sought to rely B upon the judgment of this Court in Bairam Gupia v. Union-of India, [1987] Supp. SCC 228 in which this Court had held that a Government servant after making the application but before it becomes effective and the relationship of master and the servant ceases to operate, is entitled to . withdraw the resignation: In that case, on the facts and circumstances, it was held that he was pressurised in the first instance to voluntary retire. . c With a view to get it over he had submitted his ·application for voluntary retirement. Subsequently; he reconciled. The entitlement to withdraw the application for voluntary retirement was accepted by this Court. It is seen that. in this case, admittedly, the petitioner has stated that he was on leave for one year prior to the date of seeking vo!Untary retirement on medical . D grounds and he was unable to discharge the duties ano that, therefore, he •' had sought to voluntarily r~tire from service. It wou1d appear that when be was transferred from Shimla to Faridabad,.,he.had submitted his applica, tion in a huff for v~luntary retirement ·and that thereafter he came forward with the ·application for withdrawal. It is true that the petitioner was ;ontitled to withdraw the resignation. But in view of the fact that he has E already attained the superannuation·in normal circumstances on February 28, 1994; no useful purpose will be served by .giving direction to. permit him to withdraw his application. ' ' · Under these· circumstances, the petition is dismissed: F, R.P. .,Petition dismissed. · ,,, . . --·~ .·;·. I 0
Precedent status how later indexed judgments have treated this case
No known negative treatment found in the Courts & Cases corpus.
This is a result about the indexed corpus, not a finding that the judgment remains good law. Coverage may be incomplete.