Facts
The applicant, an Upper Division Clerk in the Employees’ State Insurance Corporation, had joined service on 11 August 1992 and completed more than twenty years of qualifying service.
Source reference: pp. 2–3Citing his cardiac illness, hypertension, and his wife’s disability following a serious accident, he submitted a notice for voluntary retirement under Rule 43 of the CCS (Pension) Rules, 2021, on 10 May 2023, with the three-month notice period expiring on 9 August 2023.
Source reference: pp. 2–3No order rejecting or withholding permission for retirement, no suspension order, and no charge-sheet were issued before expiry of the notice period.
Source reference: pp. 2–3, 9–10The respondents subsequently issued a show-cause notice concerning an alleged unauthorised loan transaction on 16 August 2023 and a charge-sheet under Rule 14 of the CCS (CCA) Rules on 16 February 2024.
Source reference: pp. 2–3Pursuant to an earlier direction in O.A. No. 133/2024, the respondents passed an order dated 2 May 2024 rejecting the voluntary-retirement request under Rule 43(3) of the CCS (Pension) Rules, 2021, on the ground that disciplinary proceedings had been initiated.
Source reference: p. 3Issues
Whether the applicant’s voluntary retirement became effective automatically on expiry of the prescribed three-month notice period when the respondents did not refuse permission before 9 August 2023
Source reference: paras. 8–10Whether a charge-sheet issued after expiry of the voluntary-retirement notice period could retrospectively justify rejection of the applicant’s request under Rule 43(3) of the CCS (Pension) Rules, 2021
Source reference: paras. 9–14Whether the respondents were required to release the applicant’s pensionary, retiral and GPF benefits, subject to adjustment of any recoverable dues
Source reference: para. 14Law Applied
The Tribunal applied Rule 43(1)–(3) of the CCS (Pension) Rules, 2021. Rule 43(1) permits a government servant with twenty years’ qualifying service to retire by giving at least three months’ notice; Rule 43(2) provides that although the notice requires acceptance, voluntary retirement becomes effective on expiry of the notice period if the appointing authority has not refused permission before that date; and Rule 43(3) permits withholding of permission where the employee is under suspension, where a charge-sheet has been issued and disciplinary proceedings are pending, or where judicial proceedings involving charges amounting to grave misconduct are pending.
Source reference: pp. 8–10The Tribunal relied on Dinesh Chandra Sangma v. State of Assam, (1977) 4 SCC 441, State of Haryana v. S.K. Singhal, (1999) 4 SCC 293, and the Delhi High Court’s decision in Union of India v. Arun Mishra & Anr., W.P. (C) No. 7917/2020, decided on 5 July 2023, for the principle that where the applicable rules permit withholding of voluntary retirement, the authority must take positive action and communicate its decision before expiry of the notice period; mere contemplation or subsequent initiation of disciplinary proceedings is insufficient.
Source reference: pp. 10–15Reasoning
The applicant had completed the qualifying service requirement and had given the prescribed three-month notice, which expired on 9 August 2023.
Source reference: paras. 8–10On that date, none of the disqualifying circumstances under Rule 43(3) existed: he was not under suspension, no charge-sheet had been issued, no disciplinary proceeding was pending, and no relevant judicial proceeding was pending.
Source reference: para. 10The respondents neither passed nor communicated an order withholding permission before the notice period expired. Consequently, under the deeming provision in Rule 43(2), the voluntary retirement became effective on 9 August 2023.
Source reference: paras. 9–14The show-cause notice issued on 16 August 2023 and the charge-sheet issued on 16 February 2024 were subsequent events and could not retrospectively defeat an already effective retirement.
Source reference: paras. 9–14The rejection order dated 2 May 2024, founded solely on the later charge-sheet, was therefore legally unsustainable.
Source reference: paras. 9–14Holding
The Tribunal allowed the O.A. and quashed the respondents’ order dated 2 May 2024.
It directed the respondents to treat the applicant as having voluntarily retired with effect from 9 August 2023 and to release all admissible pensionary and retiral benefits.
Source reference: para. 14(ii)The respondents were further directed to pay interest on the pensionary/retiral benefits and GPF amount at the applicable GPF interest rate from the date of accrual until actual payment.
Source reference: para. 14(iii)Any recoverable loan or other dues could be adjusted from the applicant’s retiral or GPF benefits, with the balance released within eight weeks of receipt of the certified order.
Source reference: para. 14(iv)–(v)Original Court PDF
Raj Kumar SainivsLABOUR AND EMPLOYMENT (MS)
Click to open original judgment
Original judgment, available to read, download and summarize on LawLens.in
![Voluntary retirement becomes effective upon notice expiry unless refusal is communicated beforehand.. Raj Kumar Saini vs LABOUR AND EMPLOYMENT (MS). CAT - ['Delhi']. LawLens](/stories/thumbnails/voluntary-retirement-becomes-effective-upon-notice-expiry-unless-refusal-is-communicated-b-50deb833e52744dbb2087dd8519006bf.webp)