IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA LPA No.531 of 2009 1. SATISH KUMAR SINHA, son of Late Vidya Charan Sinha, resident of A/60, Indrapuri Colony, Samanpura Road, Police Station- Shastri Nagar, District- Patna, at the relevant time posted as Regional Manager, Headquarter at Patna 2. Shambhu Sharan Singh, son of Late Nand Kishore Singh R/o 44, LIG Colony, Jaleswar Mandir Road, Kankarbagh, Police Station- Patrakar Nagar, District- Patna, at the relevant time posted as Medical Representative at Patna ..........appellants Versus 1. INDIAN DRUGS & PHARMACEUTICALS Limited through Chairperson- cum- Managing Director, IDPL Complex, Dundahera, Delhi- Gurgaon Road, Gurgaon, Haryana. 2. The Chairperson-cum- Managing Director, IDPL Complex, Dundahera, Delhi- Gurgaon Road, Gurgaon, Haryana 3. The General Manager [HRD], IDPL Complex, Dundahera, Delhi- Gurgaon Road, Gurgaon, Haryana 4. The Zonal Manager, Incharge [North East Zone] IDPL, 35- Havelock Road, Lucknow [UP] 5. The Divisional Manager, IDPL Plot no. 95, Road no.2, Srikrishna Nagar, Patna .............respondents ----------- 9 08-12-2009 Heard learned counsel for the appellants and learned counsel for the respondents. The main issue is whether the respondents could have accepted the offer made by the appellants under Voluntary Retirement Scheme duly notified by the respondent- Company in the year 2002. The other issue raised is whether the decision of the Company to accept the offer for Voluntary Retirement Scheme could be given effect to in view of letters of withdrawal of their offer by the appellants on 21-12-2008 vide annexure- 11 and 11/1 to this memorandum of appeal. After considering the relevant facts and documents, we find that the scheme had not been abandoned at the relevant time and, therefore, the respondents had the legal capacity to accept the 2 offer for Voluntary Retirement Scheme made by the appellants. So far as the second issue is concerned, a careful reading of the documents contained in annexure-11 and 11/1 both signed by the appellants on 21-12-2008 leaves us with no option but to hold that acceptance of the Voluntary Retirement Scheme offer by the Company was already conveyed to the appellants which they accept in those letters and after expressing their shock and dismay on account of such acceptance, they have requested the concerned authority that they may be permitted to withdraw their Voluntary Retirement Scheme offer and allowed to work. It is not a matter of punishment or compulsory retirement but only a case of voluntary retirement under a scheme and hence, we are of the view that order passed by the writ court dismissing the writ petition requires no interference. The appeal is, therefore, dismissed. BKS/- (Shiva Kirti Singh, ACJ.) (Shyam Kishore Sharma, J.)