SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2009 Supreme(All) 3527

2010 (3) AWC 3215 (LB)
(ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT—LUCKNOW BENCH)
Sibghat Ullah Khan and Anil Kumar, JJ.
W.P. No. 6164 (S/B) of 1986
Decided on November 12, 2009
Ashok Gyan Prakash Sharma
Versus
U. P. Electronics Corpn. Ltd. and others

Headnote:

resignation - employment dispute - Company Act, 1956, Section 617 - The court discussed the legal framework surrounding the acceptance and withdrawal of resignation in an employment dispute. It highlighted key legal provisions from Corpus Juris Secundum, Words and Phrases, and Black's Law Dictionary, emphasizing the voluntary nature of resignation and the authority's power to accept it. The court also referenced several Supreme Court judgments to support its decision.

Fact of the Case:

The petitioner sought to quash the acceptance of his resignation from the post of Senior Assistant Manager (Commercial) at Uptron Capacitor Limited, claiming it was obtained under duress and compulsion. The respondent argued that the resignation was valid and accepted by the competent authority.

Finding of the Court:

The court found that the resignation was validly accepted by the competent authority and that the petitioner had received the benefits admissible under law, indicating his acceptance of the resignation. Therefore, the court dismissed the writ petition, stating that the petitioner could not request withdrawal of the resignation after accepting the benefits.

Issues: Validity of the resignation acceptance, withdrawal of resignation, acceptance of benefits, and the petitioner's claim of duress and compulsion.

Ratio Decidendi: The court emphasized the voluntary nature of resignation and the authority's power to accept it. It also cited various Supreme Court judgments to support the principle that once an employee accepts the benefits of resignation, they cannot challenge the resignation or request its withdrawal.

Final Decision: The court dismissed the writ petition, ruling that the resignation was validly accepted, and the petitioner's acceptance of benefits precluded him from challenging the resignation or seeking its withdrawal.

JUDGMENT

Sibghat Ullah Khan and Anil Kumar, JJ.—Heard Sri Ashok Gyan Prakash Sharma (petitioner in person) who is now an advocate of this Court and Sri Sanjay Bhasin learned counsel for the respondents.

2. In this petition, a prayer has been made for quashing of the order dated 1.8.1986 by which the petitioner’s resignation from the post of Senior Assistant Manager (Commercial), Uptron Capacitor Limited had been accepted.

3. The factual matrix of the present case, as submitted by the petitioner, are to the effect that the petitioner was initially appointed on the post of Store Keeper in U. P. Electronics Corporation limited on a probation period and thereafter he was confirmed with effect from 30.12.1979 and by order dated 4.9.1982, he was promoted to the post of Assistant Manager (Stores) and thereafter with effect from 1.7.1984 he was promoted as Senior Assistant Manager (Commercial).

4. The relations between the petitioner and other officials of the Corporation were not cordial and in this regard he had made a complaint to the higher authorities. On 1.8.1986, when he went to the office to discharge his duties on the post in question at about 1 p.m., he received a telephonic call from the General Manager of Uptron Capacitor Limited where he was working and discharging his duties as Assistant Manager (Commercial) to meet him immediately in his office.

5. Accordingly, he met the said authority where he was compelled to write resignation letter. Ultimately, he submitted the resignation letter on the same day which was immediately accepted by General Manager of Uptron Capacitors Limited, a copy of which has been annexed as Annexure-17 to the writ petition.

6. The order dated 1.8.1986, passed by the General Manager, Uptron Capacitors Limited by which the petitioner’s resignation had been accepted, was challenged before this Court by means of present writ petition on the ground that the authority who had accepted the same, was not the competent to accept the order of resignation as such the impugned order dated 1.8.1986 was without jurisdiction and nullity, further the same had been obtained under duress and compulsion from the petitioner and after submitting the same, he had requested for withdrawal of his resignation letter which was not accepted in arbitrary manner.

7. Sri Sanjay Bhasin, learned counsel for the respondents, in rebuttal, has submitted that the petitioner’s appointment as Store Keeper in connection with the Capacitors Project of the U. P. Electronics Corporation Limited, Lucknow on 21.11.1978 and at the time of his appointment as Store Keeper, the Capacitors was in the project stage and the Subsidiary Company known as Uptron Capacitors was in the offing.

8. Later on, the Uptron Capacitor Limited was registered as Government Company under the provision of Section 617 of the Company Act, 1956 with effect from 13.3.1979. As such the services of the petitioner was transferred as Store Keeper in Uptron Capacitors Limited and was confirmed by order dated 11.1.1980, passed by the Project Manager with effect from 30.12.1979 so the petitioner was an employee of the Uptron Capacitors Limited and not of the U. P. Electronics Corporation Limited.

9. It has further been submitted by the learned counsel for the respondents that on 1.8.1986 due to personal and domestic circumstances, the petitioner had submitted his resignation in his own hand writing from the post of Senior Assistant Manager (Commercial) which was accepted on the same day by the General Manager of Uptron Capacitors Limited, who was competent authority to do so, in view of the resolution dated 7.7.1986, passed by the Board of Directors of the Uptron Capacitors Limited, by which the General Manager (K. D. Bhargava) was authorized to exercise the said power. In this regard, he has relied on the relevant portion of the said Resolution, the relevant portion of which is quoted below :

“In exercise of the powers vested in me I hereby sub-delegate to Sri K. D Bhargava,







































































Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
Judicial Analysis

AI

SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

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

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top