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

2026 Supreme(Online)(HP) 2520

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



Petitioner Advocates:Ajay Kumar Dhiman ,Respondent Advocate: AG

A prospective resignation or notice of voluntary retirement can be withdrawn by an employee at any time before the effective date of retirement, provided there is no legal or contractual bar, as the employer-employee relationship continues until that date.

Headnote:(A) Constitution of India - Articles 14, 16 and 309; Himachal Pradesh Civil Services (Premature Retirement) Rules, 1976 - Rule 3(2) - Prospective resignation - Withdrawal of notice for voluntary retirement - Jural relationship between employer and employee - If an employee tenders a prospective resignation or notice of voluntary retirement to take effect from a future date, they possess the right to withdraw such communication at any time before it becomes effective. In the absence of a legal, contractual, or constitutional bar, the employee has locus poenitentiae to change their mind before the actual termination of service.

(B) Service Law - Termination of employment - A complete and effective act of resigning office is one which severs the link of the resigner with the office and terminates its tenure. Until the date specified for retirement is reached, the employee continues to be a government servant and is entitled to withdraw the notice of retirement.

Facts of the case:
An employee applied for premature retirement from government service, suggesting a future date. The competent authority accepted the request but fixed an earlier date for the retirement to be effective. One day prior to the designated date of retirement, the employee submitted an application for the withdrawal of the resignation. Despite the receipt of the withdrawal application, the authority relieved the employee from duties on the scheduled retirement date. The employee challenged the orders of retirement and relieving as illegal.

Findings of Court:
The court found that the application for withdrawal was filed before the cut-off date fixed for retirement. Since the resignation was prospective, the jural relationship between the employee and the employer had not ceased at the time the withdrawal request was made. The action of the respondents in relieving the employee despite the timely withdrawal request was found to be patently illegal and violative of Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution of India.

Issues: Whether an employee can withdraw an application for premature retirement after acceptance by the authority but before the effective date of retirement.

Ratio Decidendi: A prospective resignation is to take effect from the date mentioned in the application or the date fixed by the authority; until that date is reached, the employment tenure is not terminated. Therefore, an employee is entitled to withdraw the resignation before the effective date, as the employer-employee relationship persists until the actual date of retirement.

Result: Petition allowed and the impugned orders are quashed and set aside.

Legal Category Hierarchy

  • administrative law
    • service law
      • premature retirement (Para 15)
      • withdrawal of resignation (Para 16, 17)
  • constitutional law
    • fundamental rights
      • right to equality (articles 14 and 16) (Para 16, 18)
  • practice and procedure
    • writ jurisdiction
      • certiorari and mandamus (Para 18)

Table of Contents

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 )

3. Can an employee withdraw a voluntary retirement notice before the effective date?

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 )

4. Does acceptance of resignation before the effective date prevent withdrawal?

No, the jural relationship continues until the effective date, so the employee retains locus poenitentiae to withdraw. (Para 16 )

5. Does receiving retirement benefits preclude challenging an illegal retirement?

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,

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