IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Moksha Nagpal ......Appellant Vs.

Managing Director, Haryana State Industrial .....Respondents Reserved on : 03.11.2025 Pronounced on: 22.01.2026 Uploaded on: 22.01.2026 Whether only the operative part of the judgment is pronounced? NO Whether full judgment is pronounced? YES CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE SUDEEPTI SHARMA Present: Mr. Gaurav Sharma, Advocate for the petitioner.

Mr. Jagbir Malik, Advocate and Mr. Shubham Malik, Advocate for respondent Nos.1 and 2.

****

SUDEEPTI SHARMA J. (Oral)

1. The present appeal is preferred against judgment and decree dated 02.11.2002 passed by Civil Judge (Jr. Division), Division and judgment and decree dated 20.03.2006 passed by learned District Judge, Chandigarh, whereby, the civil suit filed by the appellant was dismissed and the appeal filed by him was also dismissed.

2. Brief facts of the case as per pleadings in the civil suit are that appellant was appointed as Media Manager on probation in HSIDC on 15.05.1995. Her services were confirmed on 17.05.1996. From 1995 till 1998 appellant was harassed by respondent No.3-Deputy General Manager (PR), Haryana State Industrial Development Corporation Limited, who issued frivolous memos and chargesheets.

3. On 02.09.1998 appellant tendered her resignation (Ex.P-8). On 07.09.1998 resignation was accepted (Ex.P-9). Upon communication of order dated 07.09.1998, whereby, resignation of appellant was accepted, appellant submitted representation dated 15.09.1998 to Managing Director stating therein that her resignation letter never gave any indication that resignation may be accepted forthwith and she requested to allow her to continue to perform her duties till the expiry of three months i.e. 02.12.1998. The said request was rejected vide order dated 06.10.1998, thereafter, another representation dated 20.11.1998 was filed and on 27.11.1998 appellant withdrew her resignation. On 05.02.1999 she made further reminder requesting reinstatement. On 03.05.1999 legal notice was served upon respondents. On 25.08.1999 she filed civil suit for declaration to the effect that order dated 07.09.1998 accepting the resignation letter dated 02.09.1998 and order dated 06.10.1998 rejecting representation dated

15.09.1998 be declared illegal, null and void.

4. Civil suit filed by her was dismissed vide judgment and decree dated 02.11.2002 by learned Civil Judge, Jr. Division Chandigarh. She filed appeal against judgment and decree dated 02.11.2002 which was also dismissed vide judgment and decree dated 20.03.2006 passed by District Judge, Chandigarh. Hence the present regular second appeal.

5. Learned counsel for the appellant contends that :-

i) That resignation was not voluntary but was obtained under coercion.

ii) That her resignation is illegally accepted before expiry of statutory notice period.

iii) That withdrawal of resignation within the notice period renders acceptance invalid.

iv) That no authority can deduct salary in lieu of notice period without consent.

v) That impugned order is passed in violation of principle of natural justice.

6. Findings of both the Courts are perverse and against evidence on record.

7. Further that appellant has not been given three years service benefit such as gratuity, leave encashment, General provident fund etc. till date.

8. Learned counsel for the appellant relies on the following judgments to support his arguments:-

i) Rajbir Singh Vs. The Haryana State Cooperative Development Federation Ltd.; 1992 (3) S.C.T. 574 ii) Sham Sunder Vs. The Director of School Education, Haryana; 1994 (4) S.C.T. 616

9. Per contra, learned counsel for the respondents contends that both Courts have rightly dismissed the civil suit filed by the appellant as well as the appeal filed by her since the resignation was accepted on 07.09.1998 and she submitted withdrawal of resignation on 27.11.1998 and the resignation cannot be withdrawn after its acceptance.

10. Learned counsel for the respondents relies on the following