Rajasthan Rajya Vidhyut Prasaran Nigam Limited Through Its Chairman And Managing Director, Vidyut Bhawan, Janapath, Jaipur. Respondent For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Sandeep Singh Shekhawat For Respondent(s) : Mr. Dheeraj Palia Mr. Akshay Sharma HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANOOP KUMAR DHAND Reserved on : 03/02/2023 Pronounced on : 23/02/2023 Reportable ORDER (1) The issue involved in this petition is that "whether the petitioner can withdraw his resignation after its acceptance?" (2) Facts of the case as per the petitioner, are that the petitioner was appointed as Overseer (Electrical) and he joined the said post on 22.09.1975 as a preservice trainee. Thereafter he was appointed as Junior Engineer/Overseer and on 29.9.2003 he was promoted to the post of Assistant Engineer (E&M). (3) The petitioner submitted a notice dated 1.8.2008 under Regulation 18(3) of the RSEB Employees Service Regulations, 1964 (for short "Regulations 1964") seeking voluntary retirement (for short "VRS") with effect from (for short "w.e.f.") 15.11.2008, (Downloaded on 28/02/2023 at 11:47:06 PM) [2023/RJJP/001685] (2 of 18) [CW8228/2009] but the said application was rejected by the respondent vide order dated 5.11.2008, on account of shortage of manpower. After that, again a similar application was submitted for seeking VRS on 10.12.2008 stating therein that his 80 years old father is suffering from Prostate and wife is suffering from Arthritis (pain in joints) and due to his busy schedule of duties, he is not in a position to take care of his family, due to which he remains under depression. But no order was passed on this second application, hence he sent reminder on 29.1.2009 but no orders were passed on these applications. (4) The petitioner tendered his resignation on 13.4.2009 before the respondent with request to accept his resignation w.e.f. 16.5.2009. (5) In terms of Regulation 16 of the Regulations 1964, the respondent accepted the resignation of the petitioner vide order dated 14.5.2009 w.e.f. 16.5.2009 and the order dated 14.5.2009 was communicated to the petitioner. After receipt of the order dated 14.5.2009, the petitioner submitted an application on 25.5.2009 to the respondent that a mistake has been committed by him, so the petitioner be reinstated back in service. When the petitioner was not reinstated back in service, the petitioner submitted this petition before this court with the following prayer : "It is, therefore, prayed that the Hon'ble Court may call for the entire record concerning the case and by issuing writ, order or direction or in the nature thereof; (i) quash the orders dated 5.11.2008 and 14.5.2009 and treat the petitioner to be deemed to (Downloaded on 28/02/2023 at 11:47:06 PM) [2023/RJJP/001685] (3 of 18) [CW8228/2009] have retired voluntarily from service and be given all consequential benefits from the said date alongwith interest thereto; (ii) further quash the order dated 5.11.2008 and hold that the respondent could not have rejected the application of voluntary retirement on the ground mentioned therein; (iii) any other order or direction as may be deemed fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case may also be passed in favour of humble petitioner;" (6) Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner rendered thirtythree and a half years in service and contributed amount in his pension fund. Counsel submits that on account of family circumstances, it was not possible for the petitioner to continue with the service that is why he submitted the application seeking voluntary retirement, but the same was rejected by the respondent on the ground of shortage of staff. Counsel submits that when the petitioner tendered resignation for the same family reasons, his resignation was accepted by the r