A resignation must be voluntary; prior acceptance is not mandatory for it to take effect, with the defining factor being the nature of the employee's role under the Industrial Disputes Act.

JUDGMENT :

M. K. THAKKER, J.

1. Rule returnable forthwith. Learned advocate Mr.D.G.Shukla with learned advocate Ms.Meswa Bhatt waive service of Rule on behalf of respondent.

2. The present petition is filed challenging the award passed by the learned Labour Court, Bharuch in Reference LCB No.218 of 2016 dated 11.12.2018, whereby learned Court has rejected the claim of the petitioner for reinstatement on the ground that the petitioner does not fall under the definition of section 2(s) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 as well as he fails to establish that the resignation was forceful in nature.

3. As per the claim of the petitioner raised before the learned labour court he was appointed as a Diploma Engineer Trainee with the respondent establishment with effect from 01.06.2012. He received the increment on 01.06.2013 and he was promoted on the post of Supervisor on 01.06.2014. On 06.10.2015 he was forced to resign from the service by one Mr.Kiran Kulkarni- Manager HOD of the Maintenance Department and though there was a provision of two month’s notice, he was not allowed to work from the next day. He withdrew his resignation on 02.12.2015 by sending the communication, however, the same was not replied, therefore, again on 14.12.2015 he sent a reminder which was replied by the respondent Management by intimating to the petitioner that his resignation has already been accepted therefore, he cannot be taken back in the service. He claimed that without paying the retrenchment compensation and one month notice pay, his services were terminated in violation of section 25(f) of the I.D.Act by the respondent Management, therefore, claiming the reinstatement with full back wages, the reference came to be filed. The respondent Management appeared before the learned Reference Court and submitted that the petitioner, being a Supervisor, was not punctual in his service and was not following the instructions of his senior Officers. He used to quarrel with the co-employee and has issued threats to face the dire consequences. He was found negligent in discharging his duties and on 14.12.2014, along with his other subordinate staffs he was found to be sleeping during duty hours and for that the notice was issued on 10.01.2015. On tendering apology in writing accepting his misconduct, the Management has taken a lenient view. Thereafter, from 30.05.2015 to 05.10.2015 he remained absent without taking prior permission and on 06.10.2015 on resuming the duty he tendered his resignation on the ground that his uncle passed away and he has responsibility of his family, therefore, he cannot continue in the service and thereafter, he left the premises. After two months of the date of resignation on 02.12.2015 he withdrew his resignation and on receiving the second reminder, the respondent replied that on 06.10.2015 the resignation which was tendered was already accepted and therefore, he cannot be reinstated. Learned Court, on considering the evidence adduced by both the parties, has passed judgment and award dismissing the reference filed by the present petitioner which is impugned before this Court.

4. Heard learned advocate Mr.Yogen Pandya with learned advocate Mr.Lamba for the petitioner and learned advocate Mr.Shukla with Ms.Meswa Bhatt.

4.1. It is submitted by the learned advocate Mr.Lamba for the petitioner that learned Court has committed error in not appreciating the evidence to the effect that the Superior of the petitioner has forced him to resign by threatening him to cause harassment and as the petitioner does not have any other option except to sign the resignation, the same was conside