Voluntary Resignation and Withdrawal of Termination Order by Mutual Consent Renders Challenge to Contractual Termination Infructuous.

Facts

The Applicant, a Project Engineer at the Centre for Development of Advanced Computing (C-DAC), Noida, filed an Original Application (OA) under Section 19 of the Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985

Source reference: p. 2, para. 1

He challenged an impugned termination order dated 10.03.2026, which sought to end his contractual services effective 23.04.2026

Source reference: p. 2, para. 1(a)

The Applicant sought reinstatement, continuity of service, and an extension of his tenure similar to other situated persons

Source reference: p. 2, para. 1

During the hearing for interim relief, the respondents (C-DAC) proposed a settlement whereby the Applicant would resign voluntarily in exchange for the withdrawal of the termination order and the issuance of a clean experience certificate

Source reference: p. 3, para. 3

Issues

1. Whether the termination order dated 10.03.2026 should be set aside and replaced by a voluntary resignation process to protect the Applicant’s future employment prospects?

Source reference: p. 3, para. 3

2. Whether the Applicant is entitled to arrears of salary and an experience certificate upon the cessation of his contractual employment?

Source reference: p.3, para. 3(iv-v)

Law Applied

Section 19 of the Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985, which governs the adjudication of disputes regarding the service conditions of persons appointed to public services.

Source reference: p. 2, para. 1

Principle of judicial settlement and consent orders, where a dispute is resolved based on mutually agreed-upon terms between the employer and the employee to avoid further litigation.

Source reference: p. 4, para. 4-5

Reasoning

The Tribunal did not conduct a full merit-based review of the termination's legality because the parties reached a settlement during the proceedings.

Source reference: no citation

The Counsel for C-DAC (Respondents 2-4) offered a five-point compromise: the Applicant would resign within three days; the Respondents would accept the resignation and simultaneously withdraw the impugned termination order

Source reference: p. 3, para. 3(i-iii)

This analysis shifts the termination from a punitive/involuntary action to a voluntary separation, thereby preserving the Applicant's eligibility for future selection processes

Source reference: p. 3, para. 3(ii)

The court ensured that the Applicant’s right to earned wages and proof of service was protected by directing payment of admissible salary and the issuance of a "satisfactorily working" experience certificate within ten days of relieving

Source reference: p. 3, para. 3(iv-v)

The Applicant, present in person, consented to these terms

Source reference: p. 4, para. 4

Holding

The OA was disposed of in terms of the settlement.

The Court held that both parties are bound by the following directions: (1) The Applicant shall resign within three days; (2) The Respondents shall withdraw the termination order dated 10.03.2026 and relieve him within two days of the request; (3) The Applicant remains eligible for future recruitment based on merit; (4) Admissible salary must be paid within ten days of relieving; and (5) A certificate of satisfactory experience must be issued within the same ten-day period

Source reference: p. 3-4, para. 3-5

No order was made as to costs

Source reference: p. 4, para. 6