Probationers must adhere to the notice period as per company rules; payment in lieu of notice, once made, precludes contesting its necessity.

JUDGMENT

1. By way of the present writ petition, Petitioner assails the letter dated 03.07.2020, whereby representation of the Petitioner dated 27.05.2020 seeking refund of Rs.1,74,253/- was rejected and he was informed that since the Petitioner had failed to give the required notice before tendering resignation and the money sought to be recovered was paid in lieu of the two months' notice, he was not entitled to refund of the amount. A direction is also sought to Respondent No. 1 by way of mandamus to refund the said amount to the Petitioner along with interest @ 12% per annum with effect from 07.02.2020 till the date of payment.

2. The brief and relevant facts as set out in the petition are that Respondent No. 1 issued an Advertisement in October 2018 for appointment on various posts, including the post of Manager (Law) under a special recruitment drive. Petitioner being a law professional and while working in another Public Sector Undertaking, applied for the post of Manager (Law), in November 2018.

3. On 25.03.2019, the shortlisted candidates were called for interview for the post of Manager (Law) and the Petitioner successfully cleared the interview. An offer letter dated 30.07.2019 was sent to the Petitioner enclosing therewith the Terms and Conditions of the employment.

4. On 13.12.2019, Petitioner joined the services of Respondent No. 1 as Manager (Law), retaining a lien of one year on his post with the previous employer, i.e. REC Limited. Petitioner was posted at the Corporate Office, where he worked for about one month.

5. Having worked for a short span, Petitioner on 15.01.2020 submitted his resignation and requested for being relieved by 22.01.2020. As per the case set out by the Petitioner, he had categorically stated in the letter that being on probation, he was not required to serve notice and relied on the terms of the offer letter. However, instead of being relieved on acceptance of the resignation, Petitioner was informed vide e-mail dated 23.01.2020 that he was required to serve three months' notice as per the GAIL GENERAL TERMS AND CONDITIONS OF SERVICE RULES (hereinafter called the GAIL Rules). Petitioner claims that he thereafter met the concerned officers to ascertain the provisions which required him to serve a three months' notice and also sent a written representation dated 27.01.2020.

6. In the representation dated 27.01.2020, Petitioner while contesting the requirement of three months' notice, represented to the Respondents that in case the Department was of the view that three months' notice was applicable, then the Petitioner would continue in service till 18.02.2020 and requested for waiver of the balance two months' period. Petitioner also expressed his willingness to pay in lieu of two months' notice in case the same was not waived.

7. Acting on the representation, Respondents vide e-mail dated 05.02.2020 informed the Petitioner that his resignation had been accepted, subject to payment of two months' pay as the request for waiver could not be accepted. Petitioner was thereafter directed to pay Rs.1,74,253/- towards the two months' notice period, which he deposited and, on such deposit, Petitioner was