Purnendu Singh, J. – In the present appeal, appellant has assailed the order dated 07.03.2018 passed in C.W.J.C. No. 11678 of 2009 whereby and whereunder learned Single Judge was pleased to dismiss the writ application filed on behalf of the appellant.

2. The brief facts of the case are that the appellant was appointed on 01.03.1985 on the post of Assistant in the Life Insurance Corporation of India. He joined Jhanjharpur Branch on 07.03.1985. He was promoted to the post of Assistant Administrative Officer (A.A.O) in December, 1999. The appellant submitted an application dated 06.07.2006 before the Zonal Manager, Kolkata through proper channel tendering his resignation from the service which was forwarded to the Manager, LIC of India, Muzaffarpur on 07.07.2006. The appellant submitted another letter addressed to the Branch Manager on 22.09.2006 with the prayer to accept his resignation as submitted earlier. The resignation was accepted and it was conveyed to the appellant vide letter dated 14.10.2006 by the Senior Divisional Manager, Muzaffarpur. The Divisional Office, Muzaffarpur made letter dated 07.12.2006 requesting the Branch Manager, LIC of India, Block Office, Jhanjharpur to settle the terminal benefits to the appellant. When no action was taken, the appellant under Right to Information Act, 2005 on 08.06.2007 sought information from the Chairman, LIC of India, Jeevan Marg, Mumbai as to why he was not paid his retiral benefits. The Manager (CRM) vide letter dated 29.10.2007 in response to the information sought by the appellant had communicated to him that the resignation tendered by the appellant was accepted by the competent authority and as is not entitled for pensionary benefits in terms of Rule 23 of the LIC Employee Pension Rules. The appellant sought clarification vide letter dated 03.11.2007 from the Right to Information Department, Central Office, Mumbai in respect of communication dated 29.10.2007 regarding denial of his pensionary benefits. The RTI department informed if he is aggrieved by letter dated 29.10.2007 he may prefer an appeal within 30 days before the Senior Divisional Manager Operator, LIC of India, Divisional Office, Muzaffarpur. The appellant instead of preferring appeal filed his representation dated 10.12.2007 before the Chairman, LIC of India, Mumbai to the effect that due to inadvertence he had written the word ‘resignation’ in place of ‘voluntary retirement’ in his application dated 07.07.2006 and he requested that his request of resignation should be treated as request seeking voluntary retirement as the same has been made inadvertently. The appellant made his request again before the Chairman, LIC of India, Mumbai vide letter dated 19.05.2008 for grant of pension. Thereafter, the appellant filed his detailed representation before the Hon’ble President of India on 07.11.2008 raising his grievance. The Presidential Secretariat vide Letter No. P1B 2981 dated 14.11.2008 directed the Secretary, Financial Sector, Ministry of Finance, Government of India, New Delhi to inquire into the matter. In absence of any communication, the appellant vide letter dated 15.01.2009 wrote a letter to the Secretary, Financial Sector, Ministry of Finance, New Delhi for taking appropriate action. In absence of any positive response, he again submitted his petition on 04.04.2009 before the Hon’ble President of India making his submission that he did not opt for resignation rather for voluntary retirement and he should be covered under Chapter V Rule 31 of LIC Pension Rules instead of Chapter IV Rule 23.

3. Being aggrieved and dissatisfied by the action of the respondent-L.I.C., the appellant filed C.W.J.C. No. 11678 of 2009 for the following reliefs: –

“1. That the petitioner above named craves indulgence of this Hon’ble Court for issuance of a writ preferably in the nature of Mandamus commanding and directing the respondents concerned to pay the petitioner pension and other due retiral benefits as the petitioner aft