Vinod Kumar Gahan vs D/o Post

1
O.A. No.395/2017


CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL
JAIPUR BENCH, JAIPUR


ORIGINAL APPLICATION NO.395/2017


Order Reserved on: 08.10.2026

DATE OF ORDER: 23.10.2026
CORAM

HON’BLE MS. RANJANA SHAHI, JUDICIAL MEMBER
HON’BLE MR. LOK RANJAN, ADMINISTRATIVE MEMBER

Vinod Kumar Gahan S/o Sh. Nathu Lal Gahan, Age about 30
years, R/o Village and Post Bara Gaon District Jhunjhunu, Raj.
Presently posted on Radiographer at Sub Divisional Railway
Hospital Rewari, N.W.R., Division, Jaipur.

Earlier the Applicant joined on the post of Postal Assistant with
the R/3.
....Applicant

Mr. Sajid Ali, counsel for the Applicant.

VERSUS

1. Union of India through Secretary, Ministry of
Communications & I.T., Department of Post, Government of
India, Dak Bhawan, Sansad Marg, New Delhi-110001.
2. Chief Post Master General, CPMG office, Sardar Patel Marg,
Jaipur.
3. Senior Superintendent of Post Office, Jaipur City Division,
Near Mayank Cinema, Railway Station Road, Jaipur.
4. Divisional Railway Manager (Establishment), Jaipur Division,
DRM Office, Near Railway Station, Jaipur.

.... Respondents

Mr. Rajendra Vaish, counsel for Respondent Nos. 1 to 3.
Mr. Ashok Singh Shekhawat, counsel for Respondent No.4.

NATHU LAL
KUMAWAT
Uploaded by me
2026.10.23
16:35:22+05'30'
NATHU
LAL
KUMAWAT

2
O.A. No.395/2017


ORDER
Per : Hon’ble Shri Lok Ranjan, Member (A)

The present Original Application had been filed by the Applicant
to seek the benefit of continuity of his previous service rendered
under the Department of Post into his later service joined under
the Railway – both being Central Government Departments –
with pay protection and other consequential benefits.

2. Based on the pleadings of the parties on record, the
relevant matrix of facts had emerged as follows briefly. The
Applicant had joined as Postal Assistant (P.A.) under the Senior
Superintendent of Post Offices (S.S.P.O.s), Jaipur City Division
(i.e. Respondent No.3) on 05.07.2010. Purportedly, before
joining as such, he had already applied for the post of
Radiographer in the North Western Railway (N.W.R.)
Headquarters, Jaipur. Later, during his service under Respondent
No.3, the Applicant had participated in the written examination
held on 12.02.2012 and eventually at the document verification
scheduled on 17/18.01.2013 for the post of Radiographer in
N.W.R.. He had been issued the no objection certificate (N.O.C.)
dated 10.01.2013 – however, with the condition that before
taking over regular appointment elsewhere he will tender
unconditional resignation to the Department of Post, since he had
not applied for the post of Radiographer in N.W.R. through
proper channel. Eventually, the Applicant came to be selected for
the post of Radiographer in N.W.R. and was issued the offer of
appointment vide letter dated 21.04.2016 by the Divisional
Railway Manager (Estt.), Jaipur. He had then submitted his
application dated 01.09.2016 for unconditional resignation from
NATHU LAL
KUMAWAT
Uploaded by me
2026.10.23
16:35:22+05'30'
NATHU
LAL
KUMAWAT
Government Service under the Department of Post ; and the

3
O.A. No.395/2017


same came to be accepted by Respondent No.3 vide Memo dated
29.09.2016 with immediate effect. The said Memo dated
29.09.2016 had also mentioned that after acceptance of
unconditional resignation of the Applicant, any claim whatsoever
about taking him back again on duty, leave salary, refund of
security deposit, etc. will not be entertained.

3. The Applicant joined in the Railway Department/N.W.R. on
the post of Radiographer on 04.10.2016 in pursuance to the
appointment/posting Order dated 03.09/10.2016. Thereafter on
10.05.2017, he had requested the previous employer, i.e.
Respondent No.3 for sending – the Applicant’s service record,
along with the record of leave (Earned Leave and Medical Leave)
and also his last pay certificate – to the new employer, i.e.
Respondent No.4 ; so that the benefits of his previous service
can be added with his ongoing service. However, vide the
impugned Letter dated 31.05.2017, the Respondent No.3 had
rejected the aforesaid request of the Applicant by stating that in
the order dated 29.09.2016 passed with reference to his
application dated 01.09.2016, it was clearly mentioned that after
acceptance of his unconditional resignation, any claim
whatsoever about taking him back again on duty, leave salary,
refund of security deposit etc. will not be entertained.

4. Aggrieved by the same, the Applicant had filed the present
O.A. seeking the substantive reliefs inter alia – that the
impugned Order/Letter dated 31.05.2017 be quashed and set
aside with further direction to the Respondent No.(1 to 3) to send
the service record including the leave account and the last pay
drawn certificate of the Applicant in respect of service rendered
NATHU LAL
KUMAWAT
Uploaded by me
2026.10.23
16:35:22+05'30'
NATHU
LAL
KUMAWAT
by him with the Respondent No.3 from 05.07.2010 till the

4
O.A. No.395/2017


acceptance of resignation vide Order dated 29.09.2016, to the
new employer i.e. Respondent No.4 ; and further that the
Respondent No.4 be directed to add the previous service
rendered by the Applicant with the Respondent No.3 in his
service record maintained with Respondent No.4 for all purposes
and grant the benefits of the previous service including continuity
of service, pay protection and all other consequential benefits
which are available to the Applicant as per law.

5. It was the case of the Applicant that he had worked as P.A.
under Respondent No.3 in the Department of Post of the Central
Government from 05.07.2010 to 30.09.2016 ; and thereafter he
had joined as Radiographer under Respondent No.4 in N.W.R.,
which was another Central Government Department. As such, he
was entitled for the benefit of continuity of his service, as well as
pay protection as per the extant Rules/law of the Central
Government services – and there was no question of estoppel
against the statute.

Also, it was contended that he had submitted the application to
Respondent No.3 for relieving him from the post of P.A. to enable
him to join in the new employment as Radiographer in the
Railway Department/N.W.R. ; but since the same was not
accepted, he was compelled to submit an unconditional
resignation from the post of PA. Nonetheless, such resignation
cannot be a ground to deny the service benefit of previous
service under the Central Government, which were otherwise
available to the Applicant as per law.

Further, it was also contended that the Applicant had already
NATHU LAL
KUMAWAT
applied for the post of Radiographer in the Railway
Uploaded by me
2026.10.23
16:35:22+05'30'
NATHU
LAL
KUMAWAT

5
O.A. No.395/2017


Department/N.W.R. even prior to joining as P.A. under
Respondent No.3 in the Department of Post ; therefore, there
was no occasion for him to apply for the post of Radiographer
through proper channel of the Department of Post since he was
not working with the said Department at the stage of application
for that other post. Hence, even the condition prescribed vide the
N.O.C. dated 10.01.2013, regarding submission of unconditional
resignation before taking regular appointment elsewhere since he
had not applied through proper channel, was itself claimed to be
bad and illegal.

6. Vide their reply, the Respondents (No.1 to3) had accepted
only the matters of fact on record, inter alia – that the Applicant
had joined as P.A. under the Respondent No.3 on 05.07.2010 ;
that later during his service under Respondent No.3, the
Applicant had sought an N.O.C. to appear for document
verification in Railway Recruitment Board, Ajmer for the post of
Radiographer in N.W.R. ; that he had been issued the N.O.C.
dated 10.01.2013 however, with the condition that before taking
over regular appointment elsewhere he will tender unconditional
resignation to the Department of Post, since he had not applied
for the post of Radiographer in N.W.R. through proper channe. It
had also been accepted that eventually, the Applicant had
submitted his application dated 01.09.2016 for unconditional
resignation from Government Service under the Department of
Post, which came to be accepted by Respondent No.3 with
immediate effect vide Memo dated 29.09.2016 – while also
mentioning that after acceptance of the Applicant’s unconditional
resignation, any claim whatsoever about taking him back again
on duty, leave salary, refund of security deposit, etc. will not be
NATHU LAL
KUMAWAT
Uploaded by me
2026.10.23
16:35:22+05'30'
NATHU
LAL
KUMAWAT
entertained.

6
O.A. No.395/2017



Further, it had also been agreed inter alia – that after leaving the
Department of Post, the Applicant had on 10.05.2017 requested
Respondent No.3 for sending the Applicant’s service record,
along with the record of leave (Earned Leave and Medical Leave)
and also his last pay certificate to the new employer i.e.
Respondent No.4 ; and that the Respondent No.3 had rejected
the said request of the Applicant by stating that in the order
dated 29.09.2016 passed with reference to his application dated
01.09.2016, it was clearly mentioned that after acceptance of his
unconditional resignation, any claim whatsoever about taking him
back again on duty, leave salary, refund of security deposit etc.
will not be entertained.

7. Per contra, the Respondents No.(1 to 3) had contested the
other contentions of the Applicant. Vide their Reply, it had been
stated that the Applicant had not informed the Respondent No.3
about his having appeared at written examination held on
12.02.2012 for the said post of Radiographer in N.W.R. Later he
had submitted the application dated Nil which was received by
Respondent No.3 on 20.12.2012 requesting for issuing of N.O.C.
for him to appear in the interview on 17.01.2013 before the
Railway Recruitment Board, Ajmer for the post of Radiographer
as he had been declared successful in the related written
examination. Since the Applicant had not taken permission to
appear in the written examination for the post of Radiographer in
N.W.R. after joining the service under Respondent No.2, the
relevant N.O.C. was issued to him vide the Memo dated
10.01.2013, while imposing the condition that before taking over
regular appointment elsewhere he will tender unconditional
NATHU LAL
KUMAWAT
Uploaded by me
2026.10.23
16:35:22+05'30'
NATHU
LAL
KUMAWAT

7
O.A. No.395/2017


resignation to the Department of Post, since he had not applied
for the post of Radiographer in N.W.R. through proper channel.

Further it was also contended that while the Applicant had
claimed that he had submitted his resignation to the Respondent
No.3 with the purpose of joining as Radiographer in N.W.R. under
Respondent No.4, his resignation letter dated 01.09.2016 had
actually mentioned inter alia – that he was not able to attend his
duties as P.A. in Vidhyut Bhawan S.O. from 01.09.2016 due to
his personal & family reasons ; that he had deposited one month
salary of August-2016 on 01.09.2016 ; and that he was
tendering unconditional resignation from his post, while also
undertaking that he would not claim any benefit of this service in
future. The said application dated 01.09.2016 of the Applicant
for unconditional resignation from Government service had
accordingly been accepted with immediate effect vide Memo
dated 29.09.2016 of Respondent No.3.

Also, vide the reply of the Respondent No.4 on record, it had
essentially been mentioned that as the Applicant had assailed the
Order dated 31.05.2017 of the Respondent No.3., the contents of
the present O.A. and claimed reliefs were mainly related to the
Department of Post. Nonetheless, it had also been contended
inter alia – that the Department of Post letter dated 01.07.2010
had mentioned that the Applicant’s posting was purely temporary
and ad-hoc ; that the Applicant himself had not mentioned any
dates while claiming that he had undertaken the selection
process for the post of Radiographer in the N.W.R. before joining
Department of Post ; that purportedly the benefit of pay
protection can be granted for movements within Department by
NATHU LAL
KUMAWAT
way of departmental examination and not when the Applicant
Uploaded by me
2026.10.23
16:35:22+05'30'
NATHU
LAL
KUMAWAT

8
O.A. No.395/2017


had joined a new employer ; that the Applicant had categorically
mentioned at the time of joining services as Radiographer in
N.W.R. that he had resigned from the Department of Post ; and
that the since the Applicant had categorically mentioned to his
previous employer Department of Post that he would resign
before joining the Railway Department, as such the Applicant was
not entitled for benefit of counting of services rendered in the
Department of Post.

8. Along with the Reply of the Respondents No.(1 to 3), the
guidelines issued vide the O.M. dated 22.01.1993 by the
Department of Personnel & Training, Government of India – as
applicable to the cases of Government servants who had applied
for posts in some other Department before joining Government
service and on that account the applications could not be routed
through proper channel – had also been submitted. It showed
thereby that the benefit of the past service could be allowed in
such cases, subject to fulfilment of the conditions that –

(i) the Government servant at the time of joining should intimate
the details of such application immediately on their joining.
(ii) the Government servant at the time of resignation should
specifically make a request, indicating the dates that he is resigning
to take up another appointment under the Government/Government
organization for which he applied before joining the Government
service and that his resignation may be treated a ‘technical
resignation’.
(iii) the authority accepting the resignation should satisfy itself that
had the employee been in service on the date of application for the
post mentioned by the employee, his application would have been
NATHU LAL
KUMAWAT
Uploaded by me
2026.10.23
16:35:22+05'30'
NATHU
forwarded through proper channel.

LAL
KUMAWAT

9
O.A. No.395/2017


It had been argued by the learned Counsel for the said
Respondents that the Applicant had neither claimed nor was it on
record that at the time of joining as P.A. under the Department
of Post, he had intimated the details of his application for the
post of Radiographer under N.W.R. immediately on his joining.
Further, with reference to the Applicant’s resignation letter dated
01.09.2016, the learned Counsel had argued that at the time of
his resignation as P.A. under Department of Post, the Applicant
had actually not made any specific request indicating that he was
resigning to take up another appointment under the
Government/Government organization for which he applied
before joining the Government service and that his resignation
may be treated a ‘technical resignation’. On the contrary, his
resignation letter dated 01.09.2016 had mentioned of his
inability to attend his duties as P.A. due to his personal & family
reasons and that he was tendering unconditional resignation from
his post, while also undertaking that he would not claim any
benefit of this service in future. Hence, the Applicant’s claim for
his resignation from the Department of Post to be treated as
‘technical resignation’ and to be allowed his past service benefits
was an afterthought that was totally unsubstantiated and against
facts available on record.

9. It had further been submitted that the same had in fact also
been incorporated and reiterated vide the O.M. dated 26.12.2013
of the Department of Personnel & Training, Government of India,
as extant on the material dates for the present case, as part of
Consolidated Instructions on Technical Resignation and Lien, vide
Para-15 thereof. Relevantly further, it had also been provided
thereby inter alia that –
NATHU LAL
KUMAWAT
Uploaded by me
2026.10.23
16:35:22+05'30'
NATHU
LAL
KUMAWAT

10
O.A. No.395/2017


“13. A resignation from the service or post entails forfeiture of
entire past qualifying service. The exception is technical resignation
which does not result in forfeiture of past service.

14. In cases where a Government servant applied for post in
the same or the other Departments through proper channel and on
selection, is required to resign the previous posts for administrative
reasons, the benefit of past service, if otherwise admissible under
rules, is given treating the resignation as a ‘Technical Formality’.
Resignation submitted for other reasons or if competent authority
has not allowed him to forward his application through proper
channel is a resignation and benefit of past service will not be
admissible.”
In the light of the above, it had been argued by the learned
Counsel for the said Respondents that since the Applicant had
not tendered a ‘technical resignation’, but had instead tendered
an unconditional resignation for other reasons – clearly stated to
be his inability to attend his duties as P.A. due to his personal &
family reasons, while also undertaking that he would not claim
any benefit of this service in future – the same would necessarily
entail forfeiture of entire past qualifying service and benefits of
past service will not be admissible.

10. We had carefully perused the pleadings of the parties on
record, inter alia the relevant O.M.s dated 22.01.2013 and
26.12.2013 of the Department of Personnel & Training,
Government of India. The arguments of the learned Counsels for
the parties had also been heard.

11. Based on the perusal and examination as foregoing, the
case of the Applicant was for treating his resignation from his
previous service as P.A. in Department of Post as a technical
NATHU LAL
KUMAWAT
Uploaded by me
2026.10.23
16:35:22+05'30'
NATHU
LAL
KUMAWAT
formality with benefits of that service (in other words as a

11
O.A. No.395/2017


‘technical resignation’) towards his joining later as Radiographer
under the N.W.R. – despite his not having informed the
Department of Post about his appearing at the
examination/selection process for the said post of Radiographer,
purportedly as he had applied for that post before joining the
Department of Post. It was also found that while the Applicant
had claimed that reckoning the benefits of his past service with
the Department of Post cannot be denied to him as that would
tantamount to estoppel against Rules, but he had failed to show
that he had fulfilled the prescribed requirements for being
allowed such benefits.

At the outset, it was noted that even the date of his application
had not been mentioned to show that the same was prior to his
joining in the Department of Post, as such precluding his
application through proper channel. Specifically further, it had
emerged clearly that for being allowed the benefits claimed, the
Applicant was required at the time of his joining as P.A. under
the Department of Post, to intimate the details of his application
for the post of Radiographer under N.W.R. immediately on his
joining – which had not been shown to have been done by him.
Moreover, at the time of his resignation, tendered eventually vide
his letter dated 01.09.2016, the Applicant was required to make
a specific request, indicating that he was resigning to take up
another appointment under the Government/Government
organization for which he applied before joining the Government
service and that his resignation may be treated a ‘technical
resignation’ – which also had not been shown to have been done
by him. Per contra, his resignation letter dated 01.09.2016 had
mentioned of his inability to attend his duties as P.A. due to his
NATHU LAL
KUMAWAT
Uploaded by me
2026.10.23
16:35:22+05'30'
NATHU
LAL
KUMAWAT
personal & family reasons ; and had also mentioned that he was

12
O.A. No.395/2017


tendering unconditional resignation from his post, while also
undertaking that he would not claim any benefit of this service in
future.

12. In the conspectus of all of the foregoing, we hold that the
Applicant did not fulfill the prescribed requirements and hence
was not entitled for counting of the benefits of his past service in
the Department of Post after his joining as Radiographer under
the N.W.R. ; and was liable for forfeiture of such past service.
Hence, the impugned Order dated 31.05.2017 of the Respondent
No.3 was also not required to be interfered with by us.

Further, the consequential reliefs claimed vide the present O.A. –
for directions to the Respondent No.(1 to 3) to send the records
in respect of service rendered by him with the Respondent No.3
to the new employer i.e. Respondent No.4 ; and for directions to
the Respondent No.4 to add the previous service rendered by the
Applicant with the Respondent No.3 for all purposes including
continuity of service, pay protection and all other consequential
benefits – were also found to be inadmissible to the Applicant.

13. Therefore, the present O.A. was found to fail on merits and
was liable to be dismissed. We order accordingly.

14. Pending M.A.s, if any, shall also stand disposed of in
accordance. No order as to costs.


(LOK RANJAN) (RANJANA SHAHI)
ADMINISTRATIVE MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER



NATHU LAL
KUMAWAT
kumawat
Uploaded by me
2026.10.23
16:35:22+05'30'
NATHU
LAL
KUMAWAT