IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Civil Writ Petition No.1237 of 2008 Date of decision:03.05.2010 Dr. Harbhajan Singh Batth ….Petitioner versus The New India Assurance Company Limited 87, Mahatma Gandhi Road, Fort Bombay through its Chairman-cum-Managing Director and others. …Respondents CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE K. KANNAN ------ Present: Mr. D.S.Patwalia, Advocate, for the petitioner. Mr. V.Ramswarup, Advocate, for the respondents. ----- 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? ----- K.Kannan, J (Oral) 1. The order impugned in the writ petition is a communication sent through e-mail that the application for VRS made by the petitioner, was rejected and that it should be considered as resignation w.e.f. 21.02.2006, subject to the recovery of dues, if any. The rejection was purportedly on account of the fact that the petitioner, who had served on overseas posting, was required to serve for one year after his return to India. It so happened that the petitioner, who had served at Lagos was relieved from his overseas posting on 31.08.2005 and reported for duty on 09.09.2005. Before completion of one year and even within a few days, he applied for leave on 14.09.2005 when his family had settled Civil Writ Petition No.1237 of 2008 - 2 - down at Canada and the petitioner was sanctioned leave upto 31.12.2005. The petitioner had applied for an extension of leave on 12.01.2006 for another period of three months and no communication had been sent in response to his request. The petitioner had soon followed his application for leave with request for VRS on 21.02.2006. The clause relating to the pension on voluntary retirement dealt with under General Insurance (Employees) Pension Scheme of 1995 provided for an employee's entitlement, who had completed 20 years of service, to apply in writing to the appointing authority to retire such a person from service. Rule 30(2) of the said pension scheme mandates through a proviso that if a refusal of such request is not made within the expiry of the period specified in the notice, the retirement shall become effective from the expiry of the said period. 30(3) allows the employee to make a request in writing to the appointing authority to accept notice of voluntary retirement of less than ninety days giving reasons therefor. 2. The contention of the petitioner is that the respondents who had not signified their refusal to his request within the time as mentioned under Clause 30(3) must be deemed to have accepted his plea. However, the respondents themselves had issued a charge-sheet on 14.03.2006, but they decided to drop the same and communicated to the petitioner on 12.12.2006 that the period of absence would be treated as a loss of pay w.e.f. 14.12.2005. 3. The point that was still arise for consideration is whether the respondents, who had not acceded to the request for VRS could have directed the application to be treated as one for resignation. Any Civil Writ Petition No.1237 of 2008 - 3 - resignation is a voluntary act and that cannot be fed to the petitioner if he himself had not asked for it. If his application for VRS was not acceded , the consequence shall only be that he should be directed to join and more so, in a case where the management itself had decided to drop the charges which had been served on the petitioner through a charge-sheet dated 14.03.2006 and when he had otherwise, a blemishless service. The impugned communication which is challenged in the writ petition (Annexure P-9) cannot, therefore, legally supported. The order directing the communication that the plea for VRS must be taken as a request for resignation is set aside. The competent authority shall consider the request made by the petitioner on its own merit and after affording an opportunity to the petitioner to make such representation as he may volunteer to give. The respondents shall take a decision through a speaking order within a period of 12 weeks from the date of the receipt of the copy of the order. 4. The writ petition is ordered on the above terms. (K.KANNAN) JUDGE 03.05.2010 sanjeev