JUDGMENT

AHMADI, J. :- When the service of an employee is terminated consequent upon the employer accepting the resignation voluntarily tendered by the employee does the termination so brought about amount to retrenchment within the meaning of Section 2(s) read with Section 6N of the Uttar Pradesh Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, is the question which we are called upon to decide in this appeal by special leave. The facts relevant to be stated for the disposal of this appeal are as under:

Ram Singh was employed by the appellant-company on 10th March, 1960 and was posted in the Bradma machine section of the company. His duties were to attend to the printing of shares, pay-sheets, registers, ESI cards etc., relating to the appellant-company. On 1st November, 1970 he addressed a letter of resignation to the Manager of the appellant-company in the following words:

"R/Sir,

I regret to bring to your kind notice that my family circumstances do not permit me to continue my service and hence I am compelled to sever my connections with these Mills immediately.

I, therefore, request your goodself kindly to arrange for the payment of all my dues at an early date."

Two days thereafter he wrote another letter to the Manager of the company which reads as under:

"R/ Sir,

Since I have already tendered my resignation from my services, I request you kindly to depute somebody in the Bradma Office taking charge and learning the work, so that the, entrusted work may be carried on smoothly.

Thanking you so much for making early arrangement as requested."

A copy of this letter was endorsed to the Special Executive of the appellant-company for information and necessary action. On receipt of the above letters, the Manager of the appellant-company replied. as under:

"The resignation tendered by you vide your letter dated 1st instant is hereby accepted with effect from 16th instant.

Please hand over charge of the Companys properties in your possession to Shri R. S. Mathur and collect payment in full and final settlement from the Mills Pay Office."

After the receipt of this letter the charge of the Bradma Section was handed over by the employee to the said R. S. Mathur on 15th November, 1970. The amount due to the employee by way of salary, allowances, etc., up to 16th November, 1970 was worked out but the actual payment was received by the employee on 22nd December, 1970. He was also paid his service gratuity, at the end of February, 1971. It appears that the employee raised an industrial dispute and sought a reference under Section 4K of the State Act. The employees demand for a reference was initially rejected by the State Government on 12th November, 1973 but it came to be accepted subsequently on 28th November, 1974. The appellant-company thereupon Government filed a writ petition challenging the laid reference made by the State Government but the High Court dismissed the petition on 7th September, 1981. Pursuant to the reference, the Labour Court made an award in favour of the employee on 25th January, 1984. The Labour Court came to the conclusion that the employees resignation was not voluntary and, therefore, his services had been wrongly terminated with effect from 15th November, 1970. He was ordered to be reinstated. Against this award of the Labour Court the appellant approached the High Court under Article 226 of the Constitution. The High Court came to the conclusion that the employee had tendered his resignation voluntarily and without any threat or coercion. It also took the view that the claim for overtime wages was an afterthought. However, considering the definition of retrenchment in Section 2(s), the High Court came to the conclusion that the termination of service of the employee fell within the said definition and as the appellant-company had failed to observe the requirements of Section 6N, the termination of service was clearly invalid. The approach to the High Court is reflected in the following passage of its judgment:

"The contention raised is