AMITA SINGH Vs. AIR INDIA LIMITED

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Petitioner in this petition has assailed the decision contained in impugned letter dated 10.9.1997 whereby her request for grant of voluntary retirement has been rejected and it is mentioned in that letter that respondent No. 1/management has accepted her resignation w.e.f. 10.7.1997. Petitioner is not interested in the job and that is why she had submitted request dated 13.6.1997 for relieving her from duties. However she wants to be relieved as having voluntary retired from service whereas her request is treated as resignation and accepted as such.

(2.) The genesis of the dispute has the following factual background. Petitioner joined respondent No. 1 on 20.9.1974 as a Traffic Assistant. She was promoted from time to time and last promotion which she received was to the post of Traffic Supervisor. Having served for over a period of 23 years in various capacities, petitioner submitted letter dated 13.6.1997 in which she wrote that despite her best efforts to strike a balance between organisational interest and family requirements/ commitments, she was not able to cope up with the working in shifts which was a part of her assignment at the airport at that time and with deep regret she was compelled to resort to the extreme step of tendering notice of resignation from service of Air India. Letter accordingly mentions that it was notice of 'resignation' from the service. However after stating this, she further mentioned in the letter that she had been given to understand that a Voluntary Scheme for employees was in the offing and was likely to be announced shortly and in case such a scheme is announced and she fulfilled the conditions laid down for qualifying under it, the letter of resignation should be treated as an option for voluntary retirement under the scheme and case be considered under the said scheme and not as a resignation. However no reply to the aforesaid letter was received. In these circumstances, petitioner yet submitted another letter dated 17.7.1997 referring to her earlier letter dated 13.6.1997 and requested for expeditious clearance of her request contained in letter dated 13.6.1997. By another letter of even date addressed to In-charge, Uniform Stores, she returned uniform items received from the employer. Not receiving any response to her communications dated 13.6.1996 and 17.7.1997, petitioner yet wrote another letter dated 25.7.1997 in which she wrote that by her aforesaid two letters, she had requested the authorities to accept her application for grant of voluntary retirement in terms of Service Regulations. In this letter, she further referred to Regulation 46(ii) of Air India Employees Service Regulations as per which an employee could opt for voluntary retirement on having completed 20 years or more of continuous service and stated that as she was eligible for grant of voluntary retirement in terms of the aforesaid Regulation, her request for voluntary retirement be accepted under Regulation 46(ii) of the Regulations as already the matter had been delayed. However on 26.7.1997, she received letter dated 22.7.1997 in reply to her earlier letter dated 17.7.1997 stating that she was required to submit fresh resignation letter without any conditions. This letter was replied to by the petitioner vide her letter dated 27.7.1997 stating that under the relevant Rules and Regulations, an employee could resign by giving 30 days notice in .writing and on the expiry of the notice period, resignation is deemed to have been automatically granted. As he had submitted her resignation on 13.6.1997, it would be deemed that she resigned from service on 13.7.1997, and therefore, non-acceptance of resignation by letter dated 22.7.1997 was clearly incorrect and illegal. It was further mentioned that Rules did not provide that her resignation had to be unconditional and she could resign without prejudice to an application made for grant of voluntary retirement. In the last para of this letter, she requested that letter dated 22.7.1997 be withdrawn and she be granted voluntary retirement sought by her in her letters dated 13.6.1997,17.7.1997 and 25.7.1997 forthwith.

(3.) After a lull for about one & half months, petitioner received impugned letter dated ,10.9.1997 referring to her letter dated 13.6.1997 and stating as under: