IMPORTANT POINT
A resignation tendered by an employee voluntarily, unless accepted, cannot bring an end to the employment contract, as per Clause 20 of the employment contract and Rule 36 of the Gujarat Civil Services (General Conditions of Services) Rules, 2002.

ORDER :

(Biren Vaishnav, J.)

1. This appeal under Clause 15 of the Letters Patent has been filed by the appellant challenging the oral order dated 26.10.2023 passed in Special Civil Application No. 16598 of 2023. The appellant, who was the original petitioner before the learned Single Judge had made the following prayers in the petition so filed:

“(A) Your Lordships may be pleased to issue a writ of certiorari or any other appropriate writ order or direction quashing and setting aside the communication dated 22.11.2022 (Annexure-L) issued by In-charge, Central Ofiice, Ahmedabad Municipal Corporation;

(B) Your Lordships may be pleased to issue a writ of certiorari or any other appropriate writ order or direction quashing and setting aside show-cause notice dated 24.08.2023 (Annexure-M) issued by the respondent no.1, Municipal Commissioner, Ahmedabad Municipal Corporation.”

2. Facts in brief are that the petitioner was working as an Assistant Station Officer, Class-III, with the Ahmedabad Municipal Corporation. He was appointed as such by a Resolution of the Corporation dated 28.05.2019 for a period of three years on a monthly fixed pay of Rs.38,090/-. He joined his duty on 04.06.2019.

2.1 The Gujarat Public Service Commission came out with an advertisement inviting on-line applications for the posts of Assistant Director/Regional Fire Officer of the Gujarat State Fire Prevention Services, Class-I. The appellant being eligible, applied for the post.

2.2 On 01.06.2021, the Municipal Commissioner, Ahmedabad, issued a Certificate indicating that the Corporation had no objection if the appellant had so applied for the post of Assistant Director and the appellant joined his duty on 02.11.2022.

2.3 On 27.10.2022, the petitioner tendered his resignation from the post of Assistant Station Officer. The Corporation informed the petitioner that they had received his resignation on 28.10.2022. It is the case of the petitioner that since the petitioner had not given the required notice of one month, he was asked to deposit the amount of surety bond. Accordingly, the petitioner deposited the sum on 28.10.2022 and requested the Corporation that he be relieved as the amount in accordance with the contract of appointment had been so deposited.

2.4 On 22.11.2022, the Central Office of the Ahmedabad Municipal Corporation informed the appellant that his resignation is not accepted as a result of the on-going vigilance inquiry. The appellant received a show-cause notice dated 24.08.2023 inter alia asking the petitioner to show-cause as to why action should not be taken of terminating his services as though he was not qualified to be appointed he had obtained such appointment through fraud. It is in this context that the aforesaid petition with the prayers referred to hereinabove was filed.

3. After hearing the learned respective counsels for the appellant/petitioner and the lawyer for the Corporation, the learned Single Judge dismissed the petition, hence the appeal.

4. Mr.Sandip Munjyasara, learned counsel appearing for the appellant would make the following submissions:

4.1 He would submit that pursuant to the order of appointment, the petitioner – appellant joined his service. Reading the terms of the contractual appointment, Mr.Munjyasara, learned counsel, would submit that if the terms of appointment, namely, Clauses 2, 19 and 20 are read together, it would indicate that it was open for the appellant to resign from service either by tendering his resignation together with notice pay of a month or give notice and thereafter be relieved a month after the date of notice.

4.2 Mr.Munjyasara, learned counsel would submit that in the facts of this case, it is clear from the letter dated 27.10.2022 that the appellant had sought to resign after office hours immediately. By a letter dated 28.10.2022, the Corporation had informed him that in accordance with condition No.2, 19 and 20 of the conditions of appointment, the appellant was required to pay notice pay. The no