Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
Chandra Dhari Singh, J.
Army Public School Dhaula Kuan – Appellant
Versus
Archana Dhawan & Anr. – Respondents
W.P.(C) 7807 of 2022 and CM APPL. No. 23888 of 2022
Decided On : 10-08-2023
Resignation - Teacher's Resignation - Rule 114-A of DSEAR, 1973 - The court upheld the reinstatement of the respondent No. 1 on the same post on which she was working at the time of her removal from the service i.e. TGT (Physics) and Coordinator of Classes VI-VIII - The Writ Petition is dismissed.
Fact of the Case:
The respondent No. 1, a teacher, tendered her resignation on 12th November 2018, to be effective from 13th February 2019. She later withdrew her resignation, but the petitioner school rejected the withdrawal citing prior recruitment plans. The respondent filed an appeal under Section 8(3) of Delhi School Education Act, 1973, challenging the rejection of her withdrawal of resignation.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the petitioner school acted illegally by not accepting the request for withdrawal of resignation and that the respondent was entitled to withdraw her resignation prior to 13th February 2019. The court upheld the reinstatement of the respondent No. 1 on the same post on which she was working at the time of her removal from the service.
Issues: The main issue was whether the impugned order reinstating the respondent no. 1 within four weeks is liable to be set aside.
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the resignation should be made voluntarily by the employee, and if the employee withdraws such resignation, it is duly entitled to do so. The court also found that there was no error in the impugned order and that the petitioner's arguments were not tenable in view of the factual matrix and legal position of the case.
Final Decision: The Writ Petition was dismissed, and the reinstatement of the respondent No. 1 on the same post was upheld.
ORDER
Chandra Dhari Singh, J.(Oral)--The present writ petition under Article 226/227 of the Constitution of India has been filed by the petitioner seeking the following reliefs:
"a) Issue a writ of certiorari and quash the impugned Judgment dated 12.01.2022 passed by Ld.Delhi School Tribunal, Delhi in Appeal n. 09 if 2019 titled as Archana Dhawan Versus Army Public School and Anr.;
b) Issue any other writ/direction as this Hon'ble Court may deem fit in the facts of the case."
2. The factual matrix is recapitulated herein below:
a) The respondent No. 1 joined the petitioner's school as TGT (Science) on 29th April 1983.
b) The respondent No.1 applied for the position of principal which was rejected by the petitioner school and eventually respondent no.1 submitted an application dated 12th November 2018 tendered her resignation on the ground that the environment in the school had not been conducive for welfare and growth of students and faculty at large.
c) The said Application for voluntary retirement was accepted by competent authority vide order dated 19th December 2018 with effect from 13th February 2019 and the same was forwarded to respondent No. 2 i.e. Directorate of Education on 26th December 2018.
d) The petitioner submitted another letter dated 05th February 2019 and 08th February 2019 whereby she withdrew her resignation.
e) The petitioner School vide order dated 12th February 2019 rejected her Application. Thereafter, the respondent No. 1 filed an Appeal No. 09 of 2019 before learned Delhi School Tribunal, Delhi on 25th March 2019 wherein she challenged the Order dated 12th February 2019 passed by the Petitioner's School.
f) The learned Tribunal vide Order dated 12th January 2022 allowed the Appeal. Therefore, aggrieved by the said judgement, the petitioner preferred the present petition.
3. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner humbly submitted that according to Rule 114-A of DSEAR, 1973, respondent No. 1's resignation was accepted vide order dated 19th December 2018 w.e.f. from 13th February 2019 and the same was forwarded for approval of respondent No. 2 on 26th December 2018. The period of thirty days after giving the resignation as per Rule 114-A of DSEAR, 1973 came to an end on 25th January 2019.
4. It is further submitted that as per the law, the withdrawal of resignation is not permissible after 25th January 2019.The respondent no. 1 cannot on its whims and fancies give a resignation and subsequently, withdraw it.
5. It is submitted that respondent No. 1, a senior teacher tendered her resignation at a very crucial stage of the academic session which increased the load of the petitioner school.
6. It is submitted that from November 2018 till February 2019, respondent No.1's approach had become extremely lackadaisical in her work since she started avoiding responsibility as a coordinator, taking leaves frequently including on days of annual inspection sans any official intimation.
7. It is submitted that the Chairman and Patron of the petitioner School also met respondent No.1 to request her to reconsider her resignation, howbeit, the respondent was adamant in not reconsidering her decision.
8. It is submitted that the respondent No. 1 filed an Appeal No. 09 of 2019 before learned Delhi School Tribunal, Delhi wherein the tribunal allowed the said appeal, quashing the resignation of the respondent no. 1 and reinstating the respondent no. 1 back to her position vide order dated 12th January 2022.
9. It is contended that the Tribunal has not considered the material placed on the record and wrongly placed passed its order in the said appeal.
10. It is further contended that the Tribunal has not considered the fact that the petitioner has herself voluntary tendered the said resignation. Therefore, the respondent no. 1 cannot now pray for her reinstatement.
11. In view of the foregoing submissions, the counsel for the petitioner prayed that the petition may be allowed and the reliefs as claimed by the
The main legal point established in the judgment is that a teacher's resignation should be made voluntarily, and if the employee withdraws such resignation, it is duly entitled to do so.
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the acceptance of an employee's resignation within a specified period is mandatory under Rule 114A of the Delhi School Education Rules, 1973, ....
A resignation tendered and accepted under Rule 114A of the Delhi School Education Rules is deemed effective if not opposed within 30 days by the Director of Education, even if coercion is later claim....
A prospective resignation can be withdrawn before it becomes effective, as established by the court's interpretation of relevant legal principles.
Non-communication of acceptance of resignation does not invalidate the resignation, and the resignation becomes effective on its acceptance, even if the acceptance is not communicated, as long as the....
The main legal point established in the judgment is that a government servant can withdraw their resignation before its acceptance, as provided under Rule 7 of the Uttar Pradesh Government Servants R....
A resignation cannot be withdrawn after its acceptance.
A resignation can be withdrawn before acceptance by the authority concerned, and in the absence of statutory provisions, the decision to accept a resignation should be justifiable.
The mandatory nature of Sec. 7 of the Maharashtra Employees of Private Schools (Conditions of Service) Regulation Act, 1977, and the burden on the management to demonstrate the voluntary nature of a ....
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
