The High Court dismissed a writ petition challenging the rejection of an application to be reinstated. It held that the petitioner, who resigned voluntarily without confirmation or lien, was not entitled to be taken back and the Tribunal held no error. The petition was dismissed.
The writ petition was dismissed with no costs awarded.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
- 1 -
WP 1376/15
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
BENCH AT AURANGABAD
WRIT PETITION NO.1376/2015
Nandlal Gangaram Patil.
...Petitioner..
Versus
The State of Maharashtra & another.
...Respondents...
.....
Shri A.S. Deshmukh, Advocate for petitioner.
Smt.P.V. Diggikar, AGP for respondent nos.1 & 2.
.....
CORAM: S.V. GANGAPURWALA & K.L. WADANE, JJ.
DATE: 08.12.2016
ORDER :
1]The petitioner was appointed as a Police Constable
in the Home Department on or about 1.9.2010. In July,
2012, the petitioner was selected and appointed as a
Canal Inspector with Irrigation Department of the State
Government. The petitioner tendered his resignation on
19.7.2012. Subsequently, he came to be terminated in the
said department and thereafter applied to the Police
Department for taking him back in service. The said
request is rejected. Aggrieved thereby, the petitioner
WP 1376/15
- 2 -
filed Original Application before the Maharashtra
Administrative Tribunal. The said original application
is dismissed. The said judgment is assailed in the
present petition.
2]Mr.Deshmukh, learned counsel for the petitioner,
submits that the petitioner would be entitled to the
benefit of Rule 46(2) of the Maharashtra Civil Services
(Pension) Rules. According to the learned counsel, the
petitioner in fact sought to be relieved from his service
so as to join another Government service. However, the
word “resignation” was a misnomer. The learned counsel
submits that the respondents ought to have taken the
petiitoner back in service.
3]Learned AGP submits that the petitioner is not
entitled to be taken back in service. Rule 46 (1) of the
Maharashtra Civil Services (Pension) Rules read with Rule
46(5) of the said Rules would apply. The petitioner had
also filed an application in contravention with the
Government resolution dated 30.12.1991.
4]We have considered the submissions canvassed by the
learned counsel for the parties.
5]It is not disputed that the petitioner did not
WP 1376/15
become permanent and was not holding any lien on the post
of Constable with the Home Department. He had not
completed even two years of his service with the Home
Department as a Police Constable and before that only he
had tendered his resignation. In the letter dated
19.7.2012 in the subject, the petitioner had mentioned
that his resignation be accepted so also in the contents
of the letter written by the petitioner to the authority,
it is stated that his resignation from the Police
Department should be accepted. The letter read in its
entirety states that the petitioner intended to tender
resignation and had tendered his resignation.
6] Even otherwise, the petitioner was never confirmed
in service. He does not have a right of lien. As such,
the case of the present petitioner cannot be considered
from any pedestal. The Tribunal had not committed any
error in that regard.
7]In the light of the above, writ petition is
dismissed. No costs.
(K.L. WADANE, J.) ndk/ c8121616.doc
(S.V. GANGAPURWALA, J.)
2 issues framed by the court
Whether a petitioner who resigned voluntarily without confirmation or lien to another department can be taken back without following statutory rules.
Whether Rule 46(2) of the Maharashtra Civil Services (Pension) Rules applies when resignation was accepted.
3 provisions across 1 enactments
Nandlal Gangaram Patil
The State of Maharashtra
S.V. GANGAPURWALA
K.L. WADANE
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court