M.L. Yadav S/o Late J.P. Yadav vs Union of India through the General Manager South East Central Railway, Bilaspur

Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

2025 Supreme(Chh) 298

IN THE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR
SANJAY K.AGRAWAL, RADHAKISHAN AGRAWAL
M.L. Yadav S/o Late J.P. Yadav – Appellant
Versus
Union of India through the General Manager South East Central Railway, Bilaspur – Respondent

Advocates Appeared:
For the Appellants : Rajesh Kumar Kesharwani, Shrijita Kesharwani
For the Respondents: Ramakant Mishra, Rishabh Dev Singh

Table of Content
1. challenge to vrs withdrawal and its implications. (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 4)
2. petitioner's argument against dismissal of vrs withdrawal. (Para 5 , 6)
3. voluntary retirement conditions and judicial review. (Para 8 , 9 , 10)
4. interpretation of rule 67 and withdrawal of vrs. (Para 11 , 12 , 13 , 14 , 15 , 16)
5. calculation of notice period for vrs. (Para 17 , 18)
6. consequential benefits and post-retirement engagement. (Para 19 , 20)
7. final ruling on the case and entitlement to benefits. (Para 21)

ORDER :

1. Invoking the writ jurisdiction of this Court under Article 226/227 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner herein has filed this writ petition calling in question legality, validity and correctness of the impugned order dated 24-2-2025 passed by the Central Administrative Tribunal, Jabalpur Bench (Circuit Sitting at Bilaspur) in Original Application No.319/2017, by which his original application has been dismissed by the learned CAT holding that his application for withdrawal of voluntary retirement from service has rightly been rejected by the respondents.

2. The aforesaid challenge has been made on the following factual backdrop.

3. The petitioner herein, the th