The present writ petition was heard and disposed of by order dated 21.5.2009. Aggrieved thereby, the respondent (The Oriental Insurance Company Ltd (for short “ the Insurance Company”) and its officials preferred writ appeal being L.P.A. No. 1386 of 2010 (The Oriental Insurance Company Ltd & Ors Vs. Malay Kumar Lala). Learned Division Bench of this Court allowed the said appeal and after setting aside the order dated 21.5.2009, remitted the case to the Writ Court for hearing and decision afresh. The respondent Insurance Company was granted liberty to file pleadings/counter affidavit in the writ petition. That is how the matter has come up for consideration before this Court.

2. Setting of facts giving rise to the application are as under:-

Petitioner was serving as Scale-IV officer under the respondent Insurance Company. On 6.8.2007 (Annexure-1), he submitted his resignation from the service of the Insurance Company. On 14.11.2007, he unilaterally relinquished the job/service of the Insurance Company and joined another private company called Royal Sundaram Alliance Insurance Company Ltd. and thereafter served the said company for 02 years. Under the relevant Rule of the Insurance Company called Personnel Manual Chapter-II (iv), an officer of the rank of the petitioner was required not to leave or discontinue the service without first giving the notice in writing to the Appointing Authority and the period of notice required to be given in the case of the petitioner was three months. The aforesaid period of 90 days expired w.e.f. 4.11.2007. On 13.5.2008, a charge-sheet (Annexure-8) was served on the petitioner. On receiving the said article/memo of charge, the petitioner by a communication dated 9.2.2009 sought to withdraw his resignation dated 6.8.2007 (Annexure-1). On 16.2.2009 (Annexure-11), petitioner claims to have submitted his joining in the office of Chief Regional Manager, Patna. On 12.6.2008, the respondents sought to initiate a departmental proceeding. Petitioner appeared in the departmental enquiry and requested to supply documents enabling him to file show cause. In the meantime, by communication dated 25.3.2009 (Annexure-14), he was informed that his joining has not been accepted whereafter he filed a representation before the Chairman-cum-Managing Director of the Insurance Company seeking appropriate direction on the authorities to permit him to join. Since no action was taken thereon, the present writ petition was filed seeking quashment of the letter dated 25.3.2009 (Annexure-14) by which his rejoining in the Insurance Company and to pay salary from the date of joining of the Insurance Company was declined.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that till acceptance of his resignation and communication thereof, the petitioner would be entitled to withdraw the resignation. It is next contended that from their own action, it would appear that the respondent Insurance Company have not accepted the resignation of the petitioner as on 13.5.2008, a charge-sheet was served on the petitioner for imposing major penalty. In the submission of the petitioner, initiation of departmental proceeding presupposes existence of master and servant relationship. In the submissions of learned counsel, the respondent Insurance Company would be wholly unjustified in treating him to have resigned from the service and at the same time to initiate and proceed with the departmental proceeding for infliction of major penalty. This will amount to blowing hot and cold at the same time. Learned counsel submits that if the respondent Insurance Company intends to proceed against him departmentally then it is incumbent upon the respondents to treat the petitioner in the service of the Insurance Company and permit him to join the service. The stand of the respondent Insurance Company in not permitting him to join the service and at the same time to proceed with departmental proceeding is not only inexplicable but also contrary to law si