Resignation of a permanent teacher only becomes effective upon expiry of the mandatory three-month notice period.

The respondent, a permanent teacher, submitted her resignation on 03.03.2003

The management accepted the resignation on 05.04.2003 and communicated it on 17.04.2003

Subsequently, the respondent attempted to withdraw her resignation vide letters dated 29.05.2003 and 23.06.2003

She filed a writ petition seeking a direction to the management to accept her withdrawal, arguing that her resignation could not be accepted before the expiry of the mandatory three-month notice period

The learned Single Judge allowed the petition, noting that while reinstatement was impossible due to the school's closure in 2014, she was entitled to consequential benefits and consideration for government absorption

1. Whether the management could validly accept the resignation of a permanent teacher before the expiry of the three-month notice period prescribed under the relevant rules

2. Whether the three-month notice period is solely for the benefit of the employer or also provides the employee a "cooling-off" period to withdraw the resignation

Rule 42 of the Bombay Primary Education Rules, 1949, which stipulates that no permanent teacher shall resign without giving a three months’ notice

Section 40(C) of the Bombay Primary Education Act, 1947, establishes that a resignation becomes effective only upon the expiry of the statutory notice period, regardless of whether a specific date is mentioned in the letter

The Court rejected the management's argument that the notice period exists solely to allow the school to find a replacement

It reasoned that the three-month requirement serves a dual purpose: first, it assists management in recruitment; second, and more crucially, it provides the teacher an opportunity for introspection to ensure the resignation was not made in haste

Since the respondent submitted her resignation on 03.03.2003, the Court determined it would only become legally effective on 03.06.2003

Consequently, the management's premature acceptance of the resignation on 05.04.2003 was deemed "improper" and invalid, as the employee retains the right to withdraw the resignation before the statutory period expires

The court affirmed that the respondent is entitled to consequential benefits, to be paid by the appellant trust, and directed the government to sympathetically consider her absorption elsewhere

However, the court granted a stay on the operation of this judgment for 12 weeks to allow the appellant to approach the Supreme Court