Back
SANJAY KUMAR MEDHI
Sourav Baruah, S/o. Late Thaneswar Baruah – Appellant
Versus
State of Assam, Represented by the Commissioner and Secretary to the Government of Assam, Agriculture Department – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
Sanjay Kumar Medhi, J.
Heard Shri P.C. Dey, learned counsel for the petitioner whereas the Department of Agriculture is represented by Ms. R. Bora, learned Standing Counsel.
2. The extraordinary jurisdiction of this Court conferred by Article 226 of the Constitution of India is being sought to be invoked by the petitioner, who has put to challenge an order dated 04.08.2022 passed by the Director of Agriculture by which the application for voluntary retirement has been rejected. The principal ground of such rejection is that the petitioner did not have the eligibility criteria of having completed 20 years of service.
3. Before going to the issue which has arisen for determination, the basic facts of the case can be put in a nutshell in the following manner.
4. The petitioner was appointed as an LDA on 26.10.1986 and was posted in the Office of the Executive Engineer, Jorhat Division of the Agriculture Department, Government of Assam. He was transferred to Dibrugarh in the year 2002. However, he had suffered from tuberculosis and accordingly had applied for medical leave. It is the case of the petitioner that his application for extension of medical leave was however not grante
The court reaffirmed that once an application for voluntary retirement is submitted and the conditions are met, it is deemed accepted unless explicitly rejected within the stipulated time, and prior ....
A government servant's qualifying service includes periods of unauthorized absence unless a disciplinary proceeding is initiated. The voluntary retirement request must be accepted if not explicitly r....
The main legal point established is the deemed acceptance of a government servant's Voluntary Retirement application under F.R. 56(c) if not rejected within the prescribed period, and the jurisdictio....
The main legal point established in the judgment is the eligibility for premature retirement under Rule 3(2) of the Himachal Pradesh Services (Premature Retirement) Rules, 1976, and the interpretatio....
Minor punishments do not negate eligibility for voluntary retirement; unauthorized absence does not affect completed service for retirement calculations.
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
