Back
2019 Supreme(Del) 119
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
C. HARI SHANKAR, J.
GOVIND RAWAT - Petitioner
Versus
UNION OF INDIA & ORS. - Respondents
W.P.(C) 5371 of 2017
Decided On : 09-01-2019
For the Petitioner: Mr. Matrugupta Mishra and Ms. Aastha Chawla, Advs.
For the Respondents: Mr. V.S.R. Krishna and Mr. V. Shashank Kumar, Adv.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the interpretation of the conditions attached to the acceptance of the petitioner's resignation and the determination of whether there was a legal acceptance of the resignation.
Headnote:
resignation - post graduate course - [Memorandum dated 11th June, 2015, Memorandum dated 1st February, 2016, Memorandum dated 30th March, 2016] - The court discussed the clauses in the memorandums related to the petitioner's resignation from the post graduate course and the conditions attached to it. The court interpreted the memorandums and concluded that the petitioner was entitled to continue pursuing his post graduate course in Prosthodontics.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner was admitted for a post graduate course in Prosthodontics at AIIMS and later requested to resign due to personal reasons. AIIMS accepted the resignation subject to a condition of depositing Rs. 5,00,000. The petitioner later withdrew the resignation and requested to continue the course, but AIIMS rejected the request.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the acceptance of the petitioner's resignation was subject to a condition, which was never fulfilled, and therefore, there was no acceptance of the resignation in law. The court concluded that the petitioner was entitled to continue pursuing the post graduate course.
Issues: The issues involved the acceptance of the petitioner's resignation, the conditions attached to the resignation, and the subsequent rejection of the petitioner's request to continue the course.
Ratio Decidendi: The court's decision was based on the interpretation of the memorandums related to the petitioner's resignation and the conclusion that the conditions were not fulfilled, leading to no legal acceptance of the resignation.
Final Decision: The court quashed and set aside the impugned communication dated 30th March, 2016 and allowed the writ petition with consequential relief to the petitioner.
1. The issue in controversy in this writ petition being very short, with consent of parties, the matter has been heard finally and is being disposed of by this judgment.
2. Consequent to his application and response to admission notice no. 2/2015, dated 10th May, 2015, issued by the All India Institute of Medical Sciences (AIIMS), the petitioner was admitted for the post graduate course in Prosthodontics, conducted by the AIIMS on 1st July, 2015. The memorandum, dated 11th June, 2015, informing the petitioner of his selection and admission contained the following clause :
“He/She will be on contract service for a period of 3 years and will be designated as Junior Resident. He/She will be paid salary in PB-3 with G.P. of Rs.5400/- plus NPA and other allowances as admissible under the rules in 1st year of the residency. In the event of his/her leaving the course within six months of joining, he/she shall be liable to pay a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- (Rupees One Lakh Only) and those who leave after six months of joining shall be liable to pay a sum of Rs. 5,00,000/- (Rupees Five Lakh Only) by way of compensation/losses incurred by the AIIMS due to such midstream departure. The salary for the month in which the date of resignation falls will stand forfeited. The “Sponsored” candidates will not be paid any emoluments by the Institute and the responsibility of their payment will be on their respective Government/Organizations.”
3. The petitioner joined the post graduate course in Prosthodontics on 1st July, 2015. The duration of the course was three years.
4. On 21st January, 2016, the petitioner wrote to the Dean of the AIIMS, informing that, owing to personal reasons, it was not possible for him to complete the post graduate course and requesting, therefore, that he be permitted to resign from the said course. The said letter may be reproduced thus :
“Through proper channel
Dated : 21/01/2016
To,
The Dean
AIIMS Ansari Nagar,
New Delhi.
Subject: Request for Resign of post-graduation course (Academic Junior Residence).
Respected Sir,
This is to inform you that I am not able to complete my post graduation course because of some personal reasons. Please allow me to resign from the post of Junior Residence. I would be grateful for the same.
Yours faithfully,
Sd/-
Dr. Govind Rawat
Junior Residence Academic
Department of Prosthodontics
AIIMS, New Delhi”
5. The AIIMS responded to the said request of the petitioner, for permission to resign from the course, vide the following memorandum, dated 1st February, 2016 :
“ALL INDIA INSTITUTE OF MEDICAL SCINECES
ACADEMIC SECTION
No.F.4-7/2015-ACAD.1
Ansari Nagar, New Delhi-29
Dated : February 1, 2016.
MEMORANDUM
Subject: Request for acceptance of resignation in r/o. Dr. Govind Rawat, Junior Resident (PG) in the department of Prosthodontics.
x x x x x x x x x x
With reference to his/her application dated 21.01.2016 on the subject cited above, Dr. Govind Rawat, Junior Resident (PG) in the department of Prosthodontics is informed that the Dean has been pleased to accept his/her resignation w.e.f. 04-01-2016 subject to the condition that he/she has to deposit draft of Rs.5,00,000/- (Rupees Five Lakh only) towards Penalty for discontinuation of P.G. Course in the Mid-term. The salary for the month of January, 2016 is forfeited.
He/She is required to deposit EHS Card/Identity Card issued to him/her if any.
Sd/-
(Satish Kumar Singh)
Administrative Officer (Acad.)
Dr. Govind Rawat
Junior Resident (PG)
In the department of Prosthodontics
Copy to: 1. Prof. And H.O.D. of Prosthodontics
2. Accounts Section II and III/RPC/CNC
3. Hostel Section
4. Dr. B.B. Dikshit Library”
(Emphasis Supplied)
6. It is clear from a reading of the afore-extracted memorandum, that the acceptance of the petitioner’s resignation has been made “subject to the condition” that Rs. 5,00,000/- is deposited by him. Learned counsel appearing for the AIIMS made a valiant effort to convince the Court that this order was in terms of the afore-extracted clause in the memorandum da
