1. Petitioner argued right to withdraw before effective date; respondent contended acceptance of resignation barred withdrawal. (Para 15 )
IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JIYA LAL BHARDWAJ
Ramesh Chauhan – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF HP and ors – Respondent
CWPOA/1398/2019
1. Petitioner argued right to withdraw before effective date; respondent contended acceptance of resignation barred withdrawal. (Para 15 )
2. Petition allowed; impugned orders quashed; petitioner reinstated with consequential benefits and revised pension. (Para 18 , 19 )
Yes, unless there is a legal, contractual, or constitutional bar, a prospective resignation can be withdrawn at any time before it becomes effective. (Para 16 )
No, the jural relationship continues until the effective date, so the employee retains locus poenitentiae to withdraw. (Para 16 )
No, if the retirement itself was illegal, the employee is entitled to reinstatement and benefits despite having accepted retirement benefits. (Para 17 )
IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA
2026:HHC:17407
CWPOA No.1398 of 2019
Decided on: 14th May, 2026
Ramesh Chauhan ...Petitioner
versus
State of H.P. and others ...Respondents
Coram o
Hon'ble Mr.Justice Jiya Lal Bhardwaj, Judge.
Whether approved for reporting?1 Yes
For the petitioner: Mr.Ajay Kumar Dhiman,
Ms.Sakshi Bhardwaj and Ms.Neha Negi, Advocates.
For the respondoents: Mr.Vishwa Deep Sharma, Additional Advocate General.
(Oral)
Jiya Lal Bhardwaj, Judge
The petitioner by way of present petition, has prayed for the following substantive reliefs:-
a) A writ in the nature of certiorari may be issued and thereby quash the impugned order dated 24-2-2014 Annexure P-2 and order of transfer dated 23-4-2014 Annexure P-4.
b) A writ in the nature of mandamus may be issued and thereby directing the respondent no 3 to allow the petitioner to work at IGMC Shimla till the final outcome of this writ petition.
The facts, which emerge from the pleadings, are that the petitioner was appointed as Radiographer with the respondent-Department in the year 1980 and joined his duties on 22.10.1980. Thereafter, he was promoted to the post of Senior Radiographer and was serving in the IGMC Shimla. The petitioner was transferred vide or.der dated 23.03.2013 from IGMC, Shimla to CHC Amb (Matri), District Una, H.P. Feeling aggrieved by the said transfer order, he had preferred CWP No.1770 of 2013, titled, Ramesh Chauhan vs. State of H.P. and others before this Court and this Court vide judgmentr dated 24.05.2013, quashed the transfer order dated 23.03.2013. However, later on, the petitioner was again transferred vide office order dated 27.12.2013 from IGMC, Shimla to Zonal Hospital, Dharam shala, District Kangra, H.P. The petitioner again feeling aggrieved by the transfer order, preferred CWP No.10026 of 2013, which was disposed of on 06.01.2014 by granting liberty to him to approach the respondents/competent authority by making a representation, who will decide the same by a speaking and reasoned order. However, the petitioner neither filed any representation nor turned up for the personal hearing and was relieved, in compliance with the transfer order dated 27.12.2013.
The petitioner again approached this Court by preferring CWP No.1656/2014 against the transfer order dated 27.12.2013 and his relieving, however, his p.etition was dismissed as withdrawn with liberty to comply with the order passed by this Court in CWP No.10026/2013. The petitioner instead of joining at the transferred place, had applied for voluntary retirement on 24.01.20 14 from Government service and had specifically mentrioned the date as 30.04.2014. As per request made by the petitioner, respondent No.2 had passed an office order on 24.02.2014 (Annexure P-2) retiring him from Government service on 23.04.2014 afternoon under Rule 3(2 ) of Himachal Pradesh Civil Services (Premature Retirement) Rules, 1976, subject to the condition that outstanding amount, if any, shall be recovered from the official concerned first, before the date of his retirement.
The petitioner before the date of his retirement fixed as 23.04.2014,moved an application on 22.04.2014 (Annexure P-3) for withdrawal of his resignation. But respondent No.3 had passed an office order on 23.04.2014 (Annexure P-4) relieving the petitioner from his duties on premature retirement on his request, under Rule 3(2) of the Himachal Pradesh Civil Services (Premature Retirement) Rules, 1976 in compliance with the earlier order dated 24.02.2014 passed by respondent No.2. The petitioner feeling aggrieved by his premature retirement had issued l.egal notice dated 06.07.2014 (Annexure P-5), averring therein that neither any action has been taken on the withdrawal application of resignation made by the petitioner, which was received vide Diary No.3201 date d 22.04.2014 in the office of respondent No.2,nor any rintimation has been given to him. Respondent No.2 after receipt of the legal notice had passed an order on 26.07.2014,
Union of India and others vs. Gopal Chandra Misra and others
Balram Gupta vs. Union of India and another
Air India etc. v. Nergesh Meerza & Ors. etc.
Shambhu Murari Sinha vs. Project & Development India Limited and another
J.N. Srivastava versus Union of India
Nand Keshwar Prasad versus Indian Farmers Fertilizers Cooperative Ltd. & Ors.
Power Finance Corporation Ltd. versus Pramod Kumar Bhatia
Air India Express Limited and others vs. Captain Gurdarshan Kaur Sandhu
North Zone Cultural Centre and another vs. Vedpathi Dinesh Kumar
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.