SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

2007 Supreme(SC) 1043

A.K.MATHUR, MARKANDEY KATJU
Food Corporation of India – Appellant
Versus
Ramesh Kumar – Respondent


ORDER

Heard learned counsel for the parties in all these appeals. All the three cases involve similar question of law therefore, we dispose them of by the common order. The facts given in the case of C.A.No.1611/2006 are taken into consideration. The respondent an employee of the Food Corporation of India applied on 13.9.2006 for voluntary retirement in pursuance of the scheme of Voluntary Retirement floated by them on 29.6.2002. He revoked his offer and has withdrawn the same on 27.9.2004 but despite withdrawal, his offer for voluntary retirement was accepted on 9.11.2004. This order of retirement dated 9.11.2004 was challenged by the respondent by filing a writ petition before the Division Bench of the Punjab and Haryana High Court. The Division Bench relying upon the earlier judgment given under Gurcharan Singh vs. FCI allowed the respondents request and quashed the order dated 9.11.2004.

Hence the present appeal by the Food Corporation of India.

We have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record. The short question before us is when the applicant has made the application for withdrawal before it could be accepted, can the Food Corporation of India still




Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top