01Facts
The appellant, an Assistant Teacher, submitted a resignation on 17 September 2012.
¶ 1–2 · pp. 1–3On 3 October 2012, he entered into a settlement with the management and submitted a further resignation by affidavit, acknowledging that he had resigned and that no service dues remained against the institution.
¶ 1–2 · pp. 1–3On 7 October 2013, he sought to withdraw his resignation.
¶ 3–4 · pp. 3–4After the management did not accept his request, he approached the Tribunal, which rejected his application.
¶ 3–4 · pp. 3–4The learned Single Judge dismissed his writ petition, noting the delay and that the appellant had misrepresented the period of delay before the Tribunal.
¶ 3–4 · pp. 3–4He then filed this appeal.
¶ 3–4 · pp. 3–402Issues
i.1. Whether the appellant could withdraw his resignation after a delay of more than a year, in the circumstances of the case
¶ 6–7 · pp. 4–5ii.2. Whether the appellant could resile from the resignation affirmed by affidavit as part of the settlement with the management
¶ 5–7 · pp. 4–503Law Applied
The Court applied the principle that a request to withdraw a resignation must be made within a reasonable time.
¶ 6 · p. 4It also assessed the resignation in light of the parties’ settlement and the appellant’s subsequent resignation by affidavit.
The judgment cites no statute or precedent.
04Reasoning
The Court found that the appellant’s resignation was voluntary and given pursuant to a settlement under which he received the benefits due to him; he had also submitted a second resignation by affidavit on the settlement date.
¶ 5–6 · p. 4His request to withdraw the resignation came more than a year later, beyond a reasonable time.
¶ 6–7 · pp. 4–5The Court further noted that his stated reason for resigning—“unavoidable circumstances”—was inconsistent with the admitted settlement and the affidavit resignation.
¶ 6–7 · pp. 4–5In these circumstances, the Tribunal and the learned Single Judge were justified in rejecting his claim.
¶ 8 · p. 505Holding
The Court answered the issues against the appellant and dismissed the appeal, finding no reason to interfere with the Tribunal’s and the learned Single Judge’s decisions.
¶ 8 · p. 5The pending civil application was consigned to the record.
¶ 9 · p. 5Original Court PDF
BABUBHAI HIRABHAI VANKARvsSTATE OF GUJARAT
Click to open original judgment
Original judgment, available to read, download and summarize on LawLens.in
