IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Civil Writ Petition No.7237 of 2010 Date of Decision : May 13, 2010. Dr.Gagandeep Kaur .....Petitioner versus State of Punjab and others .....Respondents CORAM : HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE SURYA KANT. Present : Mr.Virinder Kumar Shukla, Advocate, for the petitioner. Mr.B.S.Chahal, DAG, Punjab. -.- 1. Whether Reporters of Local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? 2. To be referred to the Reporters or not? 3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest? --- Surya Kant, J. (Oral) The petitioner is aggrieved at the order dated 1.6.2009 (Annexure P-4) whereby his resignation from the post of Medical Officer has not been accepted by the respondent-department on the ground that there is “paucity” of Medical Officers and that her resignation is declined in the “public interest”. The petitioner joined as Medical Officer in the Department of Health and Family Welfare, Government of Punjab, on 15.11.1995 on regular basis. The undisputed facts are that there was no charge-sheet or any disciplinary proceedings pending against her when, after 14 years of spotless service, she submitted her resignation on 15.5.2009 alongwith C.W.P.No .7237 of 2010 2 three months' pay in lieu of the notice period. The said resignation has been turned down vide the impugned order for the reasons already mentioned above. Having heard learned counsel for the parties at some length, I am of the considered view that where-ever the service conditions of a Government employee governed under the Statutory Rules so provide or entitles him, the employee has an inherent right to resign and severe the relationship of master and servant unless there is an express bar on the specified grounds. No such provision has been brought to my notice nor, as noticed earlier, there was any disciplinary proceeding pending against the petitioner at the time of submission of her resignation. The respondents, therefore, cannot refuse to accept the resignation on whims and fancies. The writ petition is accordingly allowed and the impugned order dated 1.6.2009 (Annexure P-4) is quashed. It is directed that the petitioner be treated to have resigned from service w.e.f. 15.5.2009. The subsequent disciplinary action, if any taken on the ground that she is absent from duty, shall also stand quashed. Dasti. May 13, 2010 (SURYA KANT) Mohinder JUDGE