Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

2026 Supreme(Online)(CAT) 4197

CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL
Suresh Kumar Batra, Judicial Member, Anjali Bhawra, Administrative Member
Abhishek – Appellant
Versus
Union of India through General Manager, Northern Railway – Respondent
O.A.

Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: Yogesh Putney, Kuber Vilvas
For the Respondents: Sahil Batra

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 initiate absence charges post-tendering.

Headnote:(A) Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985 - Section 19 - Indian Railway Establishment Code - Rule 302(3) - Resignation by railway servant - Group ‘C’ employee tendered resignation with immediate effect citing personal reasons after completing five-year service bond - No notice period mandated under Rule 302 or appointment letter - Acknowledged by authorities but rejected after delay citing acute staff shortage and critical post - Subsequent notice for joining duty and charge memo for unauthorized absence issued - Held, rejection on ground of staff shortage not sustainable as no disciplinary proceedings pending at time of resignation and rules do not permit forcing employee to continue - Employer cannot sit over resignation indefinitely or reject on administrative exigencies like shortage when no notice required - Subsequent disciplinary action quashed - Employee not entitled to financial benefits for service period as per undertaking. (Paras 9-14)

(B) Service Law - Resignation acceptance - Acknowledgement of resignation does not equate to acceptance; formal decision by competent authority required - However, delay in decision and rejection on invalid grounds vitiates process - Distinction from voluntary retirement where discretion wider - State cannot bind employee perpetually absent legal stipulation or pending inquiry. (Paras 10, 12)

Facts of the case:
Group ‘C’ railway employee in engineering department tendered resignation with immediate effect on date minor penalty proceedings closed with warning. Resignation acknowledged same day by controlling and personnel officers with assurances. Absent thereafter. After 1.5 months, directed to join within 7 days failing disciplinary action. Replied citing resignation. Competent authority rejected resignation citing staff shortage. Charge memo issued for unauthorized absence.

Findings of Court:
Impugned rejection order and subsequent charge memo quashed. Resignation deemed effective. Directed settlement without financial benefits for service as per applicant's undertaking during arguments.

Issues: Whether rejection of immediate effect resignation on ground of staff shortage legally sustainable; validity of subsequent disciplinary proceedings for absence post-resignation; obligation to continue duty pending resignation decision.

Ratio Decidendi: Rule 302(3) empowers competent authority to accept resignation but does not mandate notice or permit rejection on staff shortage absent pending disciplinary inquiry - Employer cannot compel service continuation or delay indefinitely; principles from precedent applied holding shortage invalid ground.

Result: Original Application allowed.

Table of Content
1. applicant's reliefs and factual background (Para 1 , 2)
2. respondents' defenses and procedural objections (Para 3)
3. undisputed facts and issue framing (Para 4 , 5 , 6 , 7)
4. irec rule 302 permits resignation without notice (Para 8 , 9 , 10 , 11 , 12)
5. staff shortage invalid ground for rejecting resignation (Para 13)
6. impugned orders quashed; oa allowed (Para 14 , 15)

O R D E R

Per: HON’BLE MRS. ANJALI BHAWRA, MEMBER (A):

1. This O.A has been filed under Section 19 of the Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985 seeking the following reliefs:

“(i) Quash and set aside the order dated 27.10.2025, bearing No.NR-UMBOPERS(MISC)/136/2025-DPO/UMB/NR (Annexure A/7), passed by the Senior Divisional Personnel Officer, Northern Railway, Ambala Cantt. (Respondent No. 3), vide which it has been communicated that the resignation tendered on 01.09.2025 (Annexure A/4) (wrongly referred to as 02.09.2025), with immediate effect, has been declined on the ground of acute shortage of staff;

(ii) Quash and set aside the Memorandum (Standard Form No. 5) No. Sr.DEN/C/D&AR/A/1/2025 dated 21.11.2025 (Annexure A-8), issued by the Senior Divisional Engineer / Coordination, Ambala Division (Respondent No. 4), proposing to hold an inquiry on the article of charges set out in Statement of Article of Charges in Annexure-1 to the Memorandum dated 21.11.2025 (Annexure A-8);

(iii) Issue a declaration to the effect that the resignation tendered by the applicant on 01.09.2025 (Annexure A/4), with immediate effect, is deemed to have been accepted, as no prior notice is mandated in the rules and law, and the applicant is deemed to have been relieved with immediate effect on the acknowledgement of the resignation by the Respondent No(s). 3 and 4, with further declaration that the ground of shortage of staff cited by Respondent No.3 for declining the resignation is not a valid ground/reason under the rules and law, and after tendering the resignation and acknowledgement of the same by the competent authority, the applicant cannot be said to have absented, much less unauthorizedly.;

(iv) Issue directions to the Respondents to release the settlement dues of the applicant as if the impugned order dated 27.10.2025 (Annexure A/7) has never been passed and the Charge Memorandum dated 21.11.2025 (Annexure A-8) has never been issued, with all consequential benefits;

(v) Pass such other or further orders or issue any other appropriate directions as this Hon'ble Tribunal may deem just, fit, and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case; and (vi) Award costs of the Original Application to the applicant as the applicant has been compelled to approach this Hon'ble Tribunal in view of the arbitrary, unjust, and illegal actions of the Respondents.”

2. The brief facts of the case as submitted by the applicant are as follows:

I. The applicant after completing Matriculation in the year 2008 and Senior Secondary in 2010, acquired the qualification of Bachelor of Technology (B.Tech) in Civil Engineering in the year 2014. Respondent Railways issued advertisement inviting applications for the posts of Senior Section Engineer/Works in the Pay Band of Rs.9,300-34,800/- with Grade Pay of Rs.4,600/-, to be filled in through the Railway Recruitment Board. The applicant successfully qualified the selection process conducted by the Railway Recruitment Board and was consequently placed on the panel notified by the respondent No.1 on 27.05.2016. Pursuant to qualifying the selection, the applicant was issued an offer of appointment for the post of Senior Section Engineer/Works in the Pay Band of Rs.9,300-34,800/- Grade Pay of Rs.4,600/- vide letter dated 25.07.2016 (Annexure A/1). As per the offer of appointment, the applicant was required to complete at least 5 years of continuous service, and in the event of failure to complete the requisite service of 5 years, the entire stipend paid during training would have to be returned along with interest. Apart from the aforesaid condition, t

Click Here to Read the rest of this document

2026 Supreme(Online)(CAT) 4197

CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNALSuresh Kumar Batra, Judicial Member, Anjali Bhawra, Administrative MemberAbhishek – AppellantVersusUnion of India through General Manager, Northern Railway – RespondentO.A.

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 initiate absence charges post-tendering.

CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL
Suresh Kumar Batra, Judicial Member, Anjali Bhawra, Administrative Member
Abhishek – Appellant
Versus
Union of India through General Manager, Northern Railway – Respondent
O.A.