C.M.Nos.1933-34-C of 2011 in RSA No.715 of 2011(O&M) -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH. C.M.Nos.1933-34-C of 2011 in RSA No.715 of 2011(O&M) Date of Decision: July 15, 2011 Rupan Kataria .....Appellant v. Astra Zeneca Pharma India Limited .....Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE RAM CHAND GUPTA Present: Mr.O.P.Gabba, Advocate for the appellant. ..... RAM CHAND GUPTA, J.(Oral) C.M.No.1933-C of 2011 In view of the facts mentioned in the application, delay of 54 days in refiling the present appeal is condoned. Application stands disposed of accordingly. RSA No.715 of 2011 The present regular second appeal has been filed against judgment and decree dated 22.4.2010 passed by learned Additional District Judge, Fast Track Court, Bathinda, vide which appeal filed by the present appellant-plaintiff against judgment and decree dated 31.8.2009 passed by learned Civil Judge, Senior Division, Bathinda, was dismissed. I have heard learned counsel for the appellant and have gone through the whole record carefully including the impugned orders passed by learned Courts below. Briefly stated, appellant-plaintiff filed a suit for declaration that his resignation was under force and that his resignation was accepted while C.M.Nos.1933-34-C of 2011 in RSA No.715 of 2011(O&M) -2- disciplinary proceedings were still pending. Hence, plea has been taken that the impugned order vide which his resignation has been accepted be declared as null and void. On the other hand respondent-defendant has taken the plea that appellant voluntarily submitted his resignation which was accepted and thereafter career option scheme advanced by the Company. Hence, it is contended that as on that day he was not employee of the Company, therefore he is not entitled for benefit of career option scheme. It has been contended by learned counsel for the appellant that though appellant was not in the knowledge that any such career option scheme was being launched by respondent-Company when he submitted his resignation and, however, the said fact was in the knowledge of respondent- Company and hence, it is contended that his resignation, which was obtained forcibly and accepted in haste. However, admitted facts are that resignation was submitted by appellant-plaintiff and the same was accepted before career option scheme was launched by respondent-Company. Option of scheme was given only to those employees, who were working in the respondent-Company on the stipulated date. However, admittedly appellant-plaintiff already stood relieved as he resigned from the job, which was accepted. Hence, in view of these facts, it cannot be said that any illegality has been committed by the Courts below in passing the impugned judgments and decrees. Finding recorded by the Courts below is fully justified by the evidence on record and is supported by cogent reasons. The said finding is not shown to be perverse or illegal nor it is based on misreading or misappreciation of the evidence. Hence, the said finding does C.M.Nos.1933-34-C of 2011 in RSA No.715 of 2011(O&M) -3- not warrant interference in second appeal. No question of law, much less substantial question of law, arises for determination in this second appeal. Accordingly the appeal is dismissed in limine. 15.7.2011 (Ram Chand Gupta) meenu Judge