JUDGMENT

Rajiv Shakdher, J. - Table of contents

Preface

Background

Submissions on behalf of AIL

Submissions on behalf of the pilots

Analysis and reasons

(I) Whether resignation operates in praesenti?

(II)Whether the resignation tendered requires acceptance?

(III)Inconsistent conduct of AIL

(IV)Relevancy of reasons in ascertaining the legal tenability of resignations

(IV) Import and scope of CAR.

(V) Cases where resignations were accepted prior to expiry of notice period

(VI) FTCs

(VII) The Sandhu case

(VII) Ratiocination of the Sandhu case

Conclusion:-

Preface:-

1. These appeals are directed against a common judgment dated 01.06.2021 [hereafter referred to as "impugned judgment", passed by the learned single judge in various writ petitions.

2. The appellant before us is Air India Limited [hereafter referred to as AIL]. The respondents, in each of these appeals, are pilots who were employed by AIL. For the sake of convenience, they will be collectively referred to as "pilots", unless the context requires them to be described otherwise.

Background:-

3. Although the record filed before us is huge and expansive, the central issue which arises for consideration veers around the following.

3.1 T