Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
Suresh Kumar Kait, Neena Bansal Krishna, JJ.
Desh Raj Singh – Appellant
Versus
Union of India – Respondent
W.P.(C) 250 of 2011 & CM APPL. 457 of 2011
Decided On : 08-02-2023
Voluntary Retirement - Central Civil Service (Pension) Rules - The court disposed of the petition as the relief sought by the petitioner had already been satisfied by an office order issued by the respondents, accepting the petitioner's voluntary retirement in accordance with the relevant rules.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner sought a direction to issue a discharge certificate for voluntary retirement after completing more than 20 years of service. An office order was produced by the respondents, satisfying the relief sought by the petitioner.
Finding of the Court:
The court disposed of the petition as the relief sought by the petitioner had already been satisfied by an office order issued by the respondents.
Issues: The main issue was the petitioner's request for a discharge certificate for voluntary retirement, which was satisfied by an office order produced by the respondents.
Ratio Decidendi: The court's decision was influenced by the fact that the relief sought by the petitioner had already been satisfied by an office order issued by the respondents, in accordance with the relevant rules.
Final Decision: The petition was disposed of as infructuous, and the pending application was also disposed of.
JUDGMENT (Oral)
1. Vide the present writ petition, petitioner is seeking a direction to the respondents to issue discharge certificate of petitioner on voluntary retirement on completion of more than 20 years services after tendering application for voluntary retirement dated 05.10.2010 and notice period had expired without conveying of acceptance or denial of it in terms of Rule 48-A (1) & (2) of Central Civil Service (Pension) Rules, 1972.
2. Learned CGSC for respondents has produced an Office Order dated 23.08.2016, issued after filing of the present petition, whereby relief(s) sought by the petitioner have been satisfied. The aforesaid Office Order is reproduced as under:
"Office of the Commandant 110 Bn CRPF C/o 56 APO
No.P.III-1/16-110-EC-1
Dated, the 23 August' 2016.
OFFICE ORDER
1. In accordance with the provision contained in Rule 43(d) of CRPF Rules 1955 read with Rule 48 (a) for CCS (Pension) Rule 1972, the notice dated 08/08/2016 tendered by No.880912826 ASI/GD DESHRAJ SINGH of this unit seeking voluntary retirement form service is hereby accepted w.e.f. 31/10/2016 (AN). Accordingly, he will proceed on Voluntary Retirement w.e.f. 31/10/2016 (AN) and will stand struck off from the strength of this unit w.e.f. the same date i.e. from 31/10/2016 (A/N).
2. As intimated by Commandant 104 BN, RAF vide O/O No.C-II-4/10-104-SRC-1 dated 04/02/2010. No.880912826 ASI/GD DESHRAJ SINGH has completed 21 years 02 months of qualifying, service as on 30/09/2009 as per PAO, CRPF, N/Delhi letter No.VQS/S-5/104 RAF/09/5144 dated 22/01/2010.
3. No.880912826 ASI/GD DESHRAJ SINGH of this unit who is proceeding on voluntary retirement form service w.e.f. 31/10/2016 (AN) is free from vigilance angle and no vigilance/judicial/criminal cases is either pending or being contemplated against him and his integrity is beyond doubt.
4. Certified that no any dues is outstanding against the individual on account of HBA, MCA and penal recoveries etc.
5. The above individual is not occupying Govt. Quarters.
(KISHORE KUMAR)
COMMANDANT-110 BN"
3. Learned counsel for petitioner, who is appearing through video conferencing, has also submitted that the relief(s) sought by the petitioner have already been satisfied and now, nothing remains in this petition.
4. In view above, the present petition is disposed of being infructuous.
5. Pending application also stands disposed of.
The court's decision was based on the satisfaction of the relief sought by the petitioner through an office order issued by the respondents, in accordance with the relevant rules.
The main legal point established is the requirement to consider the voluntary retirement application and communicate the decision before issuing transfer orders.
The application for voluntary retirement should be considered by the new unit after the petitioner's transfer.
The right to voluntarily retire under Rule 56(k) is deemed accepted if no communication is made to withhold permission before the notice period expires.
The competent authority's requirement for a retirement application at a new posting is valid, and voluntary retirement can only be denied if service interests demand it.
Point of law: if the application for voluntary retirement would have been accepted by the appointing authority on the subsequent representation moved by the petitioner, he would have retired from ser....
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the resignation of a member of the CRPF should not be accepted hastily, disregarding the mandatory notice period, and the appointing authority....
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
