Dismissed

Mr. Laxman Ganpat Gholap v. the Municipal Commissioner, Kalyan Dombivili Municipal Corporation, Kalyan and Ors.

Bombay HC5 Jan 2012WP/9315/2011

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Writ petition filed to withdraw resignation offered to contest election. Court held Rule 46(4) of Maharashtra Civil Services (Pension) Rules, 1982 does not confer absolute right to withdraw resignation; decision rests on public interest, which was not established.

What did the court decide?

Petition dismissed with no relief granted to withdraw resignation.

Mr. Laxman Ganpat Gholap Vs the Municipal… — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Bombay HC (2012)

¶1

VBC 1 WP9315.11-5.1

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE

¶3

WRIT PETITION NO.9315 OF 2011

¶4

Mr.Laxman Ganpat Gholap. Versus

¶5

The Municipal Commissioner & Anr.

¶6

..Petitioner.

¶7

..Respondents.

¶8

Mrs.V.K.Jagdale for the Petitioner. Mr.A.S.Rao for the Respondents.

¶9

CORAM : DR.D.Y.CHANDRACHUD & A. A. SAYED, JJ.

¶10

January 5, 2012.

¶11

P.C. :

¶12

The Petitioner, by a letter dated 24 August 2010,

¶13

submitted his resignation from the service of the Municipal Corporation in order to contest an election to the Municipal Corporation. The Petitioner together with his letter of resignation paid an amount equivalent to one month’s salary in lieu of one month’s notice. The resignation was accepted by the Deputy Municipal Commissioner on 1 September 2010 with effect from 24 August 2010. The Petitioner sought to withdraw his resignation having unsuccessfully contested the Municipal election by a letter

¶14

VBC 2 WP9315.11-5.1

¶15

dated 9 November 2010. The Standing Committee accepted the resignation by its resolution dated 20 January 2011.

¶16

Rule 46(4) of the Maharashtra Civil Services (Pension)

¶17

Rules, 1982 does not confer an absolute right upon an employee to withdraw his resignation. Under Rule 46(4), it is for the appointing authority to consider the request of a person who has resigned, to take him back in service in the public interest, subject to various conditions. One of the conditions is that the period of absence from duty between the date on which the resignation became effective and the date on which the person is allowed to resume duty as a result of the permission to withdraw the resignation is not to be more than ninety days. This, however, does not indicate that so long as the period is less than ninety days, the employee would, as a matter of law, be entitled to withdraw his resignation at his absolute discretion or will. Whether a resignation should be permitted to be withdrawn is a matter which has to be decided on the anvil of public interest. The Petitioner has not made out any case that in the public interest he should be allowed to withdraw his resignation.Hence, for the aforesaid reasons, we do not find any

¶18

VBC 3 WP9315.11-5.1

¶19

merit in the Petition. The Petition is accordingly dismissed.

¶20

( Dr.D.Y.Chandrachud, J.)

¶21

( A. A. Sayed, J.)

Mr. Laxman Ganpat Gholap v. the Municipal Commissioner, Kalyan Dombivili Municipal Corporation, Kalyan and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mr. Laxman Ganpat Gholap v. the Municipal Commissioner, Kalyan Dombivili Municipal Corporation, Kalyan and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

B.N. Upadhyay Vs Union of India and 3 Ors.

Maharashtra General Kamgar Union Vs the State of Mharashtra and 5 Ors.

Shipping Corporation of India Limited Vs Union of India and 2 Ors.

Shri. Shankar Digamber Poul Vs the State of Maharashtra through the State Chief Secretary Govt. of Maharashtra

Vinaykumar Vishnu Awate Vs Union of India through Joint Secretary of Law and Justice and Ors.

Shri. Shankar Digamber Poul Vs the State of Maharashtra through the State Chief Secretary Govt. of Maharashtra