Facts
The applicant, Shri Romesh B. Patel, an LSG (Postal Assistant) and Sub Postmaster, suffered a major accident in 2022, resulting in blurred vision, perspiration, and, subsequently, brain strokes leading to multiple cognitive deficits, making it medically inadvisable for him to work as a "Postmaster".
Source reference: p.2On October 8, 2024, he submitted a three-month advance notice for voluntary retirement under Rule 48(A) of the CCS (Pension) Rules, 1972 (now Rule 43 of CCS (Pension) Rules, 2021).
Source reference: p.3Following a medical examination directed by the respondents, the Chief District Medical Officer-cum-Civil Surgeon, Jamnabai General Hospital, Vadodara, certified on March 17, 2025, that the applicant was "unfit for this job at present" due to multiple medical conditions including recurrent cerebrovascular stroke and cognitive deficits.
Source reference: p.3The respondents rejected his application for voluntary retirement via orders dated August 4, 2025, May 2, 2025, and December 13, 2024.
Source reference: p.1, p.8The respondents cited an outstanding "cent-percent (100%) verification" of the Valan Sub Post Office, where the applicant had previously worked, and a past cash shortage of Rs. 12,608.76 which the applicant had made good from his own pocket.
Source reference: p.4, p.5No disciplinary proceedings were instituted or pending regarding the cash shortage.
Source reference: p.6The respondents argued that his current medical unfitness did not equate to permanent unfitness.
Source reference: p.5Issues
Whether the respondents' rejection of the applicant's voluntary retirement application on the ground of pending "cent-percent verification" of the Sub Post Office is legally sustainable, despite the applicant being declared medically unfit to discharge his duties.
Source reference: p.1, p.6, p.7Whether the respondents' denial of voluntary retirement, given the applicant's medical condition, violated his rights and the provisions of the Persons with Disabilities Act.
Source reference: p.6Law Applied
The court primarily applied Rule 43 of the CCS (Pension) Rules, 2021 (previously Rule 48(A) of the CCS (Pension) Rules, 1972), governing voluntary retirement.
Source reference: p.3, p.7It also considered the mandate of the Persons with Disabilities (Equal Opportunities, Protection of Rights and Full Participation) Act, 1995 (and amended Right of Persons with Disabilities Act, 2016), emphasizing welfare benefits and directions from OMs issued by DoP&T.
Source reference: p.6, p.8The principles of natural justice and Article 21 of the Constitution were also implicitly referenced regarding arbitrary denial of rights.
Source reference: p.4Reasoning
The court found that the applicant's severe medical conditions, including recurrent cerebrovascular stroke and cognitive deficits, rendered him unfit to discharge his duties as certified by Chief District Medical Officer.
Source reference: p.7The respondents failed to produce any contrary medical opinion.
Source reference: p.7The reason cited by the respondents for denying voluntary retirement—pendency of "cent-percent verification" of the Sub Post Office—was deemed insufficient.
Source reference: no citationThe court stated that such verification is an internal administrative process and cannot constitute a statutory bar to deny the legitimate right to voluntary retirement, especially when there are no pending disciplinary proceedings related to the past cash shortage, which was rectified by the applicant.
Source reference: p.6, p.7The court further observed that administrative inconvenience cannot override a statutory right.
Source reference: p.7It also noted that the respondents' contention that the applicant was not "permanently unfit" was untenable given his deteriorating condition and inability to attend office, with no evidence of improved fitness.
Source reference: p.7The delay in completing the verification since 2022 was an administrative lapse by the department and could not be used to deny the applicant's claim.
Source reference: p.8Holding
The Tribunal concluded that the respondents' actions were arbitrary and illegal.
It quashed and set aside the impugned orders dated August 4, 2025, May 2, 2025, and December 13, 2024.
Source reference: p.8The respondents were directed to reconsider the applicant's request/application dated April 10, 2025, for voluntary retirement sympathetically, within thirty days, taking into account his qualifying service, deteriorated medical condition, the medical certificate dated March 17, 2025, and his service record, and in public interest.
Source reference: p.8All consequential benefits were to be granted to the applicant based on the competent authority's decision.
Source reference: p.8The O.A. was disposed of.
Source reference: p.10Original Court PDF
Shri Romesh B. Patel v. Union of India [O.A. No. 365/2025]
Click to open original judgment
Original judgment, available to read, download and summarize on LawLens.in