“It is apparent from the records that the scheme was to remain in operation for a period of six months from the date of issuance of the notification, unless the time is extended by the Government. It is not in dispute that both the respondents were eligible for voluntary retirement. It is also not coming out from the records that request of an employee for voluntary retirement was to be processed within a period of three months by either accepting or rejecting the same. It was further provided that in case the competent authority fails to pass an order, rejecting request by the due date, as given in the scheme, the request would be deemed to have been accepted and the employee would be deemed to have retired from service. It is apparent from the records that no action was taken under the provisions of the Scheme. Its period was not extended by the Government. It was allowed to lapse. The matter continued to remain pending between various authorities and ultimately, decision was taken to retire the private respondents vide order dated 8.9.2005. At that time, no VRS Scheme was in operation. It was incumbent for the authorities to ask the employees again to apply under the VRS scheme by extending its time. It was not done. Some employees, who were junior to the petitioners retained in service. Appellant has failed to show any rationality in retaining the junior employees.”
