2010 Supreme(Raj) 1782
RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT AT JAIPUR BENCH
Ajay Rastogi, J.
Suresh Kumari Sharma (Smt.) - Appellant
Versus
State & Ors. - Respondent
S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 1892 of 2009.
Decided On : 27-08-2010
Advocates:
For the Petitioner:N.K. Singhal, Advocate.
For the Respondents:Pryanka Pareek, Dy. Govt. Advocate.
Headnote:
Civil Services (Classification, Control and Appeal) Rules, 1958 – The petitioner applied for voluntarily retirement on 02.07.2007 by submitting an application seeking voluntary retirement on expiry of three months – The institute did not grant her due certificate on 01.10.2008 – On 03.10.2008, she submitted application that since three months period had expired, she stood retired from services w.e.f. 02.10.2008 – The respondent contended that they had sent charge sheet to petitioner for alleged absence period from 29.07.1998 to 10.09.2002 – Petitioner contended that no communication was ever made to her regarding the rejection of her prayer of voluntary retirement within three months of statutory period – It was noted that though the charge – sheet was issued but same was never served upon her – Moreover, the charge sheet was not issued with prior sanction of the governor, hence could not be treated as valid – It was held that the petitioner stood retired from service w.e.f. 02.10.2008 by fiction of law and no disciplinary action could be initiated against her under charge – sheet dated 21.07.2009 – Hence, the petition is allowed.
JUDGMENT
1. - Matter has come upon application (No. 17467/dt.02/08/2010) seeking interim relief. At joint request, matter has been heard finally at this stage.
2. Instant petition has been filed with the grievance that despite statutory period of three months of seeking voluntary retirement as provided U/r 50(1) of Rajasthan Civil Service (Pension) Rules, 1996 ("Pension Rules") having expired, yet benefit of retiral dues on being retired from service w.e.f. 03/10/2008 has not been granted to her so far.
3. Petitioner was initially appointed as Teacher Gr.III on 06/09/1975; however, later on was promoted as Head Mistress and posted in Govt. Upper Primary School, Malipura, Bayana (Bharatpur). Looking to family circumstances, petitioner submitted application (Ann.1) on 02/07/2008 seeking voluntary retirement on expiry of three months w.e.f. 02/10/2008, duly supported by an affidavit/declaration that no disciplinary inquiry was pending against her. Even on 01/10/2008, no due dues certificate was granted to her by institution; and that apart, she submitted application (Ann.4) on 03/10/2008 that since three months period having expired, she stood retired from service w.e.f. 02/10/2008; therefore, her retiral dues admissible under pension rules be released; but no action was taken by respondents to release her retiral benefits. Hence instant petition.
4. In the reply, respondents averred that charge sheet was sent to the petitioner for alleged absence period from 29/07/1998 to 10/09/2002 (Ann.R/1); at the same time, it has also been averred that her request seeking voluntary retirement was declined vide communication dated 26/09/2008; and only material on which respondents have basically placed reliance was of her absence for the period from 26/09/1998 to 10/09/2002 without getting any leave sanctioned; and that apart, her request was declined before three months having expired; as such petitioner cannot be said to be justified in seeking voluntary retirement, as prayed for.
5. Counsel for petitioner submits that in terms of provisions contained in R.50(1) of Pension Rules, petitioner stood retired from service upon expiry of three months of her application dated 02/07/2008 and the disciplinary inquiry initiated against her thereafter under Rajasthan Civil Services (Classification, Control & Appeal) Rules, 1958 ("CCA Rules") while no disciplinary action could have been initiated against her after expiry of statutory period of three months under CCA Rules. Counsel further submits that R.50 of Pension Rules, 1996 confers a right on the employer as well as employee in the matter of retirement; however, employer can retire a Government servant by giving him three months' notice or pay in lieu thereof and at the same time, the employee has corresponding right to seek voluntary retirement by giving three month's notice provided having qualifying service to his/her credit; and if no communication is served upon Government servant on the contrary within a statutory period of notice, voluntary retirement by a legal fiction automatically comes into effect without there being any order of competent authority unless during the period of the notice, an order in writing is served upon Government servant rejecting request for seeking voluntary retirement.
6. Counsel submits that in the instant case, no communication was ever served upon her after 02/07/2008 within three months statutory period of her request; as such she may be treated to have automatically voluntarily retired from service w.e.f. 02/10/2008 and no disciplinary action can be initiated against her under CCA Rules, after her voluntary retirement came into effect on 03/10/2008 and that being so, charge sheet issued vide memo dated 21/07/2009 (Ann.R/1) itself is without jurisdiction and is liable to be quashed & set aside.
7. Government Counsel on the other hand submits that notice served by petitioner dated 02/07/2008 was an offer of seeking voluntary retirement and unless offer was accepted
Click Here to Read the rest of this document