IMPORTANT POINT
The court ruled that a discharge application must be voluntary and properly examined; failure to do so invalidates subsequent actions.

JUDGMENT :
Vijay Bishnoi, C.J.

This writ appeal is preferred by the appellants being aggrieved with the judgment & order dated 28.02.2019 passed in WP(C) No.2461/2016, whereby the learned Single Judge has allowed the writ petition filed by the respondent and has set aside the order dated 05.11.2015 passed by the Director General of Assam Rifles, Shillong, whereby the representation filed by the respondent/writ petitioner was rejected. The learned Single Judge has further observed that the respondent will be liable to be reinstated in service without any benefit of back-wages and he will be deemed to be continued in service for the purpose of other service benefits and retiral benefits.

2. Brief facts of the case are that the respondent was appointed in the Assam Rifles on 15.04.2002 in the rank of Rifleman/GD. He submitted an application on 12.08.2011 with a prayer to discharge him as soon as possible in accordance with Paragraph 4 of the ROI 1/2024. The Commandant recommended the same for acceptance on 12.08.2011 itself and a Standing Committee was convened on the very same day and a recommendation was made by the Standing Committee for acceptance of the prayer of the respondent/writ petitioner for discharge from service.

Pursuant to the said recommendation, the higher authorities issued the discharge certificate vide order dated 15.09.2011 and the competent authority, vide letter dated 15.09.2011, issued the discharge certificate approving the discharge of the respondent/writ petitioner from the services to be effective from 01.01.2012.

3. The respondent/writ petitioner challenged the said discharge order in the year 2013 by way of filing WP(C) No.7056/2013. The said writ petition was disposed of by a Single Judge of this Court vide order dated 05.08.2015. Operative portion of the said order is reproduced hereunder:-

“Submissions made by learned counsel for the parties have received the due consideration of the Court.the due consideration of the Court. As already noticed above, discharge certificate dated 03.12.2011 was issued by the 27th Assam Rifles discharging the petitioner from the service of Assam Rifles w.e.f. 01.01.2012 ‘at his own request’. Petitioner now disputes that he never made any such request for voluntary discharge. According to the petitioner, his application dated 12.08.2011 was not voluntary and was obtained under duress, which he could not withstand being a lowly ranked Rifleman in the Assam Rifles. Petitioner had submitted application dated 09.01.2013 before the Director General for cancellation of discharge order which was rejected on 14.02.2013. Relevant portion of the intimation dated 14.02.2013 reads as under:-
‘1. Refer to your letter dated 09 Jan 2013.
2. On scrutiny of your record of service, it is revealed that you were enrolled in Assam Rifles on 10 Apr 2002 and discharged from service on 01 Jan 2012 at you own request after completion of 09 years, 03 months and 28 days of service.
3. As requested by you vide application dated 12 Aug 2011, this Directorate had approved your request for discharge from service w.e.f. 01 Jan 2012. As per Rule 26 of CCS Pension Rules, 1972, resignation from service or post, entails forfeiture of past service. Thus you are not eligible for grant of pensionery benefits.
4. Also, there is no rule/provision to reinstate a person who was discharged from service at own request.’
Stand taken in the said intimation is that there is no rule/provision to reinstate a person who was discharged from service at his own request. Respondents have invoked the provisions of Central Civil Services (Pension) Rules, 1972 to contend that voluntary discharge amounts to resignation from service which disentitles the petitioner from pensionary benefits. Rule 26(1) provides that resignation from service or a post, unless it is allowed to be withdrawn in the public interest by the appointing authority, entails forfeiture of p