HIGH COURT OF KERALA
S.V. BHATTI, J
BHARAT SINGH RAWAT – Appellant
Versus
NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY CALICUT, – Respondent
WP(C)/14345/2019
Resignation - Employment Law - NIT Act 2007, Statute 30 - This case revolves around the interpretation and validity of resignation procedures under the NIT Act 2007. The court clarified that a resignation can be withdrawn before acceptance, especially when it contains conditions for withdrawal, thus influencing the decision in favor of the petitioner.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner tendered his resignation as Deputy Registrar, which he later attempted to withdraw. The resignation was accepted without proper communication, leading to the petitioner filing a writ petition against the respondent University for wrongful dismissal.
Issues: Whether the resignation was valid and, if so, whether the petitioner had the right to withdraw it prior to the acceptance being communicated.
Ratio Decidendi: Resignation is deemed to be valid only when accepted by the competent authority. An employee maintains the right to withdraw a resignation prior to the acceptance being communicated, particularly when the resignation is conditional.
Final Decision: The court quashed the resignation acceptance decisions, reinstated the petitioner with notional continuity of service and denied back wages.
J U D G M E N T
Dated this the 18th day of May 2020 Heard Bharat Singh Rawat/petitioner and Standing Counsel Shah Padman for respondent.
"Never take permanent decisions on temporary feelings" is the adage.
2. In the case on hand the decisions taken by petitioner through letter dated 08.11.2018 (Ext.P5), resigning from the post of Deputy Registrar in respondent/University; the respondent/ University after receiving Ext.P9 letter dated 28.11.2018 withdrawing the resignation tendered in Ext.P5, accepted the resignation and relieved petitioner w.e.f. 11.01.2019 and these decisions as issues of fact and law are stated for adjudication in this writ petition.
3. The circumstances preceding to the filing of the writ petition, by and large, are not in dispute between the parties. The respondent/University, pursuant to the order dated 10.01.2020 made in the present writ petition has placed before the Court the original record together with a xerox copy set of the original file for perusal of the Court. The respondent/University has prepared and placed before the Court the chronology of dates and events for convenience of the Court. This Court having regard to the undisputed circumstances leading to the filing of writ petition and as well, for convenience prefers to refer to the chronology of dates and events by referring to the record placed for perusal of this Court.
4. The petitioner possesses LLB degree from the University of Delhi and LLM from Kurukshetra University. The petitioner was an employee of Delhi Technological University. On the resignation letter submitted by the petitioner, the petitioner was relieved from service by Delhi Technological University with effect from 31.05.2016. On 17.08.2016 the respondent/University issued advertisement calling for applications from eligible candidates to fill up the post of Deputy Registrar and Assistant Registrar. The petitioner is one of the applicants for the post of Deputy Registrar, the Selection Committee in the meeting held on 07.01.2017 at IIT Madras recommended the petitioner for appointment as Deputy Registrar against the advertisement dated 17.08.2016. On 04.02.2017 the respondent issued offer of appointment to petitioner and on the same date the offer of appointment was accepted. On 07.02.2017 petitioner was appointed as Deputy Registrar and on 08.02.2017 the petitioner joined service and was entrusted with the duties of Deputy Registrar (Establishment).
5. The file produced by the University reveals that the petitioner from the earliest point in time i.e., on 12.06.2018, of joining service has been applying to different Institutions/Organisations to work on deputation and the requests made by the petitioner, subject to applicable rules and procedures, were forwarded by the respondent to the concerned Organization. The respondent University lays much emphasis on petitioner applying to different Institutions/Organisations to go on deputation to state that for all purposes the petitioner was not willing to work or continue to work at NIT Calicut.
6. The petitioner, on 27.08.2018 directly applied to East Delhi Municipal Corporation for working on deputation in East Delhi Municipal Corporation. In other words, petitioner submitted advance copy directly to East Delhi Municipal Corporation and later on requested the respondent on 10.10.2018 for approval to work on deputation in East Delhi Municipal Corporation. On 12.10.2018 the respondent forwarded petitioner’s application, as per the procedure to East Delhi Municipal Corporation.
6.1 While matters stood thus, on 08.11.2018 the petitioner submitted notice of resignation Ext.P26 to respondent. On 15.11.2018 the respondent, returning Ext.P26, called upon the petitioner to furnish the reasons for petitioner’s unhappiness which is mentioned in letter dated 08.11.2018 (Ext.P26) for resigning to the employment in respondent/University. The petitioner submitted Ext.P5 Notice of resignation dated 16.11.2018 however reiterating the contents in
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.