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

2024 Supreme(Online)(CAT) 16648

CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL
SHRI RAMESH SINGH THAKUR, MEMBER (J), MRS. ANJALI BHAWRA, MEMBER (A)
Sarita Rani – Appellant
Versus
Union of India through Secretary to Govt. of India, Ministry of Defence – Respondent
O.A.No.060/68/2021



Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: Sh. Vishal Aggarwal
For the Respondents: Sh. Sanjay Goyal, Sr. CGSC

Withdrawal of resignation is not permissible for temporary government servants under specific rules and service conditions.

Headnote:In this matter, the applicant sought relief against orders rejecting her resignation withdrawal. The applicant's claim was based on her probation completion and entitlement to child care leave, arguing she should not be treated as a temporary employee. The Tribunal found that the rejection was in line with relevant service conditions specifying that withdrawal of resignation is not applicable to temporary government servants. The main issues revolved around the eligibility for withdrawal of resignation and the completion of probation terms without passing mandatory departmental exams. The Tribunal dismissed the application, affirming the respondent's actions were lawful.

Table of Content
1. claims about resignation withdrawal and employment status addressed. (Para 1 , 2 , 6 , 12 , 14)
2. the tribunal's rationale on confirming the applicant's temporary status. (Para 4 , 5 , 8 , 19 , 20)
3. discussion on legal interpretations and eligibility concerning resignation. (Para 7 , 9 , 11 , 13 , 16 , 17 , 18)

ORDER

Per: RAMESH SINGH THAKUR, MEMBER (J):

1. This Original Application has been preferred against order dated 20.10.2020 (Annexure A-15) and subsequent order dated 15.12.2020 (Annexure A-17) whereby application of the applicant for withdrawal of resignation has been rejected by the respondents on the ground that provision of withdrawal of resignation is not applicable to temporary government servant. Applicant has sought the following relief:

i. For setting aside the order dated 20.10.2020 (Annexure A-15) and subsequent order dated 15.12.2020 (Annexure A-17).

ii. For directing the respondents to allow the applicant to join service after withdrawal of resignation with all consequential benefits.

2. Factual matrix of the case is as follows. The applicant was offered appointment vide letter dated 27.04.2011 (Annexure A-1) in the Defence Accounts Department in the post of Section Officer (A/Cs)/designated as SAS Apprentice on temporary basis with probation of two years from the date of joining. It has been submitted by the applicant that she participated in training of SAS Apprentices conducted by CENTRAD-CGDA from 18.07.2011 to 05.10.2011 (Annexure A- 2). Thereafter, respondent no. 3 issued letter dated 29.05.2014 (Annexure A-3) regarding clearance of probation, wherein the applicant is stated to have completed probation for the period from 26.05.2011 to 25.05.2013.

3. The applicant applied for Child Care Leave for taking care of premature baby under Rule 43-C Chapter V Central Civil Service (Leave) Rules, 1972, and got said leave sanctioned by the competent authority w.e.f. 11.04.2016 to 31.10.2016 (204 days) vide order dated 08.04.2016 (Annexure A-4) and further w.e.f. 01.11.2016 to 07.10.2017 (341 days) vide order dated 13.10.2016 (Annexure A-5). Thereafter the applicant moved application dated 02.07.2018 (Annexure A- 6) to keep her in service without pay as the applicant was unable to be on duty on account of personal family circumstances. The applicant took treatment from PGIMS Rohtak since 2018 (Annexure A-7).

4. The applicant moved application dated 04.01.2020 (Annexure A-8) for resignation from service w.e.f. 04.04.2020. The competent authority accepted resignation of the applicant vide order dated 10.02.2020 (Annexure A-9). The applicant moved application dated 20.03.2020 (Annexure A-10) seeking withdrawal of resignation, which was returned to the applicant by the competent authority vide letter dated 27.04.2020 (Annexure A-11) stating that the applicant has not explained unauthorized absence from duty as asked for vide letter dated 19.12.2019 and no material change in circumstances has been informed by the applicant.

5. The applicant resubmitted application for withdrawal of resignation on 11.05.2020 (Annexure A-12) with requisite clarification and medical documents. The applicant also moved representation dated 24.07.2020 before Chairman, Women Cell, Haryana Govt., Panchkula and Chairman, Women Cell, Haryana Govt., Panchkula issued request letter dated 28.07.2020 (Annexure A-13) to respondent no. 1 for sympathetic consideration of case of the applicant.

6. Respondent no. 2 issued letter dated 30.09.2020 (Annexure A-14) to the competent authority for examination of application of the applicant regarding withdrawal of resignation in terms of DoP&T OM No. 28035/2/2014-Estt(A) dated 10.06.2019. Vide impugned order dated 20.10.2020 (Annexure A-15), application of the applicant for withdrawal of resignation has been rejected by the competent authority stating as under:

“2. However, as per appointment terms and conditions, you had to compulsorily pass Part I & Part II of the Departmental Examination and you

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