Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
G.S. Sandhawalia, Jagmohan Bansal, JJ.
Uco Bank & Ors. – Appellants
Versus
Jaswinder Kaur Bhatti - Respondent
LPA-1003-2018 (O&M)
Decided On : 12-10-2022
Resignation - Employment Dispute - UCO-Bank (Officers') Service Regulations 1979 - Regulation 20
Fact of the Case:
The respondent joined UCO Bank as a Probationary Officer and later submitted her resignation. The bank accepted the resignation but did not communicate the acceptance to the respondent. The respondent later expressed her intention to withdraw the resignation, but the bank rejected her representation. The court was tasked with determining the validity of the resignation and the subsequent withdrawal.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the respondent's resignation was effective from the date of submission, as per UCO-Bank (Officers') Service Regulations 1979. The court held that the respondent's failure to deposit 3 months' salary or work during the notice period rendered the resignation effective. The court also concluded that the subsequent withdrawal of the resignation was not valid, as it occurred after the notice period had expired.
Issues: Validity of the resignation, Communication of acceptance of resignation, Withdrawal of resignation
Ratio Decidendi: The court interpreted Regulation 20 of the UCO-Bank (Officers') Service Regulations 1979, holding that an employee's resignation becomes effective upon submission, and formal acceptance is not required if no disciplinary proceedings are pending. The court also emphasized that an employee must comply with the terms of resignation, such as depositing salary or working during the notice period.
Final Decision: The court set aside the order of the learned Single Judge and allowed the appeal of the Appellant-Bank, dismissing the writ petition filed by the respondent.
JUDGMENT
Jagmohan Bansal, J. - The Appellant-UCO Bank through instant appeal under Clause X of Letters Patent of this Court is seeking consideration of order dated 30.04.2018 passed by learned Single Judge of this Court in CWP No.19210 of 2015 whereby learned Single Judge has allowed petition of the respondent-writ petitioner and directed the present appellant to reinstate the respondent with all consequential benefits including monetary ones.
Brief Facts
2. Brief facts emerging from record and which are necessary for the adjudication of present appeal are that the respondent joined Oriental Bank of Commerce on 29.11.2011 and vide communication dated 28.01.2012 submitted her resignation which came to be accepted on 02.02.2012. The respondent joined Appellant-Bank on 02.01.2012 as Probationary Officer. The writ petitioner was initially posted at newly opened branch of appellant-Bank at village Dahisara, District Sonepat. The respondent was deputed to Panchkula Branch on 08.07.2014 and thereafter she was transferred to Ambala Cantt. Branch on 07.09.2014.
3. The appellant-Bank vide show cause notice dated 27.12.2013 (Annexure R-1), alleging deriliction in duty i.e. non- compliance of lawfull instructions of the Superior/ Controlling Authorities called upon the respondent to submit her explanation. The respondent on 06.02.2014 was served upon statement of imputations/lapses, to which respondent submitted her reply and appellant vide order dated 16.06.2014, in terms of UCO-Bank Officers Employees (Discipline & Appeal) Regulations, 1976 imposed penalty of censure.
4. The respondent vide letter dated 13.11.2014 (Annexure P-2) submitted her resignation wherein she categorically stated that she is misfit and resigning from the services by paying 3 months's salary. It is apt to mention here that she did not deposit 3 months' salary even though she categorically stated that she is resigning by paying 3 months salary in advance.
5. The Head Office of appellant vide letter dated 14.02.2015 accepted the resignation of the respondent. The Deputy Zonal Head vide communication dated 24.02.2015 (Annexure R-5) informed the Branch Head that respondent may be relieved from the services of the bank on receipt of this letter subject to compliance of following terms and conditions:
'(i) Dues to the Bank, if any, should be recovered from her before relieving.
(ii) Before relieving her from the service, it should be ensured that she has submitted APR (Annual Property Return) for the Financial year 2013-14.'
6. The respondent vide email dated 28.02.2015 at about 14:27:37 p.m. was conveyed the formal decision of the Competent Authority. The respondent vide email dated 28.02.2015 at 6:52 p.m. expressed her intention to withdraw her resignation dated 13.11.2014. The respondent served hard copy of letter dated 28.02.2015 (Annexure R-7) in the branch of Appellant-Bank on 03.03.2015 but was relieved on 03.03.2015.
6 (I). The respondent vide letter dated 25.03.2015 (Annexure P-6) made a representation, praying withdrawal of her resignation. The Competent Authority vide order dated 13.06.2015 (Annexure P-7) declined request of the respondent and rejected her representation.
7. The respondent filed CWP No.19210 of 2015 before this Court which came up for consideration before learned Single Judge of this Court who vide order dated 30.04.2018 allowed writ petition of the respondent and directed Appellant-Bank to reinstate respondent with all consequential benefits including monetary benefits.
8. The Appellant-UCO Bank has come up in appeal before this Court seeking setting aside of order dated 30.04.2018 passed by the learned Single Judge of this Court.
Contention of the Appellant:
9. Learned counsel for the appellant contended that respondent at her choice submitted resignation and as per Clause (2) & (3) of Regulation 20 of UCO-Bank (Officers') Service Regulations 1979 (for short 1979 Regulations'), there was no need to accept resignation of respondent-writ petitioner. The re
The effectiveness of an employee's resignation and the validity of its withdrawal depend on compliance with the terms of resignation and the absence of pending disciplinary proceedings.
An employee has the right to withdraw the resignation before it becomes effective, and the employer's action of informing the employee that the resignation has been accepted and the employee stands r....
A resignation cannot be withdrawn after its acceptance.
An employee cannot withdraw his resignation after it has been accepted by the employer.
An employee can withdraw a resignation before it becomes effective, even if accepted, as long as the employer-employee relationship persists.
A resignation is invalid if not given with the stipulated notice under applicable rules, especially when submitted under acute mental distress.
Resignation with immediate effect by railway servant cannot be rejected on staff shortage grounds under IREC Rule 302 absent pending disciplinary proceedings; employer cannot force continuance or ini....
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
