A resignation cannot be withdrawn after the government servant takes private employment under Rule 26(6).

The applicant, a Postal Assistant, sought transfer under Rule 38 of the Postal Manual and later tendered his resignation.

The parties disputed whether the resignation was dated 27 June 2022 or 8 July 2022.

Before it was accepted, the applicant emailed an intimation on 25 December 2022 seeking withdrawal.

He had meanwhile worked for a private company from 8 September to 27 December 2022.

The respondents relied on Rule 26(6) of the CCS (Pension) Rules, 2021, and did not permit him to rejoin.

The applicant made representations seeking reinstatement, which remained unresolved, and filed this OA.

He sought a direction to rejoin on the basis that his resignation had been automatically withdrawn under paragraph 3 of the DoPT Office Memorandum dated 11 February 1988.

1. Whether the applicant’s resignation was deemed automatically withdrawn when he intimated the appointing authority of his intention to withdraw it before acceptance, notwithstanding his intervening employment with a private company.

2. Whether the respondents should be directed to decide the applicant’s pending representations concerning his request to rejoin service.

Paragraph 3 of the DoPT Office Memorandum dated 11 February 1988 provides that where a government servant intimates the appointing authority in writing that he withdraws his resignation before its acceptance, the resignation is deemed automatically withdrawn.

Rule 26(6) of the CCS (Pension) Rules, 2021 provides that a request to withdraw a resignation shall not be accepted where the government servant resigned with a view to taking up an appointment in or under a private commercial company, or the specified government-owned or government-controlled bodies.

The Tribunal noted that the applicant’s employment with the private company was established by his experience letter, and accepted the respondents’ submission that this employment brought Rule 26(6) into consideration and prevented withdrawal of the resignation.

However, it also observed that no order concerning the applicant’s termination from service had been passed, while his representations remained pending.

Rather than finally determining his entitlement to rejoin, the Tribunal considered that the respondents should decide those representations by a reasoned and speaking order.

It disposed of the OA by directing the respondents to consider the representations dated 1 March, 31 March and 26 April 2023, treating the OA as part of those representations, and to pass a reasoned and speaking order within one month of receiving the order.

No costs were awarded.