Direction to decide representation regarding refund of salary deposited during technical resignation for superior post appointment.

The Petitioner, initially employed as an Assistant Teacher (LB), participated in a recruitment process for the superior post of Teacher/Lecturer (English).

Upon his selection, he tendered a technical resignation to join the new post. The Respondent No. 5 accepted the resignation on the condition that the Petitioner deposit one month’s salary (₹33,128/-), which the Petitioner paid under protest to meet the joining deadline.

The Petitioner subsequently filed a representation on 22.07.2022 seeking a refund, arguing that a salary deposit is not required for technical resignations within the same department for superior posts.

1. Whether the Respondent No. 5 is legally obligated to consider and decide upon the Petitioner's pending representation regarding the refund of one month's salary deposited during technical resignation.

The court's decision is grounded in the principles of administrative law and natural justice, which mandate that statutory authorities must decide pending representations from employees in a timely and reasoned manner.

technical resignation to join a superior post within the same department does not necessitate the forfeiture or deposit of salary, as the service continuity is maintained for specific purposes.

The Court did not delve into the merits of whether the deposit was legally mandatory. Instead, it focused on the administrative failure of the respondents to address the Petitioner's grievance.

The State’s counsel did not oppose a limited prayer for a time-bound direction to decide the representation.

The Court found it appropriate to exercise its writ jurisdiction to ensure the administrative authority (Respondent No. 5) performs its duty to pass a "reasoned and speaking order" on the application.

The Court ordered the decision to be taken expeditiously, preferably within three months from the date of receipt of the order. Additionally, the Petitioner was granted liberty to file a fresh representation to be decided alongside the pending one.