### Shortage of Staff Does Not Justify Refusing Technical Resignation for Higher-Grade Appointment After Issuance of NOC

The applicant, a Trackman-III (Level 2) in the N.F. Railway, applied for the higher post of Station Master (Level 6) under Central Employment Notice (CEN) No. 01/2019

He obtained a valid No Objection Certificate (NOC) from the DRM (P), Lumding, on 23.03.2021

After succeeding in the qualifying examinations (CBT-1 and CBT-2), he received an offer of appointment on 02.06.2025 and was directed to join training

On 06.06.2025, he submitted a technical resignation to join the higher post

However, the respondents rejected his resignation via an impugned order dated 18.07.2025, citing staff shortages and operational exigencies in the Lumding Division

The applicant approached the Tribunal seeking to quash the rejection and for a direction to accept his technical resignation

1. Whether the respondent authorities are justified in rejecting the applicant’s technical resignation on the grounds of staff shortage and operational exigencies despite having previously issued an NOC

2. Whether the right to resign to join a higher post in the same organization can be restricted by administrative discretion outside the scope of statutory rules

Rule 1401 of the Indian Railway Establishment Manual (IREM) Vol. I, which mandates that the forwarding of applications should be the rule rather than the exception and limits the withholding of applications to specific conditions such as engagement in time-bound projects, pending disciplinary proceedings, or equivalence in rank

Supreme Court precedent in Sanjay Jain v. National Aviation Co. of India Ltd (2019) 14 SCC 492, which established that resigning is a right of the employee unless specific statutory stipulations or pending disciplinary actions intervene

Gauhati High Court's ruling in WP(C) No. 4425/2025, which held that shortage of staff is not a valid ground to withhold an employee’s resignation

The Tribunal observed that the respondents had already granted a valid NOC to the applicant in 2021, and they cannot subsequently renege on that permission after the employee has successfully qualified for the higher post

Upon reviewing Rule 1401 of IREM Vol. I, the Tribunal found that the applicant did not meet any of the three prohibitive criteria: he was not on a time-bound project, had no pending disciplinary cases, and the new post (Level 6) was higher in rank than his current post (Level 2)

The Tribunal rejected the respondents' defense of "staff shortage," noting that judicial precedent established by the Gauhati High Court expressly prohibits using administrative vacancy issues as a ground to deny an employee's career advancement

The Bench concluded that since the applicant followed the proper channel and the Railways is a single organization, the authorities were legally obligated to facilitate his transition

It held that the right to resign for career progression cannot be blocked by operational excuses when statutory conditions for rejection remain unmet

The Tribunal directed the Respondent Authorities to accept the applicant's technical resignation within four weeks, subject to the condition that the applicant will not retain a lien over his current post after joining as a Station Master in the South Western Railway