27. In the affidavit-in-reply filed by the Company, it was stated that resignation of the appellant was accepted immediately and he was to be relieved on 4- 1-1993. It was because of the request of the appellant that he was continued up to 15-1-1993. In the affidavit-in-rejoinder, the appellant had stated that he reported for duty on 15-1-1993 and also worked on that day. At about 12.00 noon, a letter was issued to him stating therein that he would be relieved at the close of the day. A cheque of Rs 13,511 was paid to him at 17.30 hrs. The appellant had asserted that he had not received terminal benefits such as gratuity, provident fund, etc. It is thus proved that up to 15-11993, the appellant remained in service. If it is so, in our opinion, as per settled law, the appellant could have withdrawn his resignation before that date. It is an admitted fact that a letter of withdrawal of resignation was submitted by the appellant on 8-11993. It was, therefore, on the Company to give effect to the said letter. By not doing so, the Company has acted contrary to the law and against the decisions of this Court and hence, the action of the Company deserves to be quashed and set aside. The High Court, in our opinion, was in error in not granting relief to the appellant. Accordingly, the action of the Company as upheld by the High Court is hereby set aside.
