MADHUBEN SHANKARBHAI PATEL Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) BY way of this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India the petitioner, who is residing at Canada since many years, through her power of attorney, has preferred the present Special Civil Application for an appropriate writ, order or direction declaring that she is entitled to get pension, gratuity, leave encashment etc. and further to declare that the petitioner has voluntarily retired from service and, therefore, she is entitled to get pension, gratuity, leave encashment etc. .

(2.) IT is the case on behalf of the petitioner that the petitioner was serving as Assistant Teacher and she served with respondent no. 3-School from 26/06/1975 to 03/10/2001. As the son of the petitioner was residing at Canada and she was residing in India alone the petitioner was compelled to leave India and, therefore, on 23/06/2001 she tendered her resignation letter with effect from 03/10/2001 to respondent no. 4 and the same was accepted by respondent no. 4. Thereafter, respondent no. 4 sent the decision of accepting the application of the petitioner for resignation to respondent no. 2 for necessary action and respondent no. 2 thereafter accepted the same with effect from 03/10/2001. It is the case on behalf of the petitioner that as such though in the application dated 23/03/2001 the petitioner has stated that she wants to resign but in fact it was an application for voluntarily retirement and, therefore, she is entitled to the pensionary benefits etc. and, therefore, she has requested to grant all the pensionary benefits to the petitioner. However, the same came to be rejected by respondent no. 4 on the ground that as per the conditions mentioned in the Government Resolution dated 06/04/2002, as the petitioner has tendered the resignation, the petitioner is not entitled to the pensionary benefits etc. The petitioner thereafter approached the Gujarat Primary Education Tribunal on 22/02/2006 for pension, gratuity etc. by way of Application No. 29/2006. The same came to be withdrawn on 16/07/2009, as according to the petitioner, there was no dispute between the petitioner and the management and as the policy decision was involved. Hence, the petitioner has preferred the present Special Civil Application under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for getting the pension, gratuity etc.

(3.) SHRI Vilas Goswamy, learned advocate appearing on behalf of the petitioner has submitted that as such in the application made in the year 2001, though it was stated as resignation, however, in fact what the petitioner intended was voluntarily retirement. It is submitted that the petitioner has been denied the pensionary benefits etc. as per the Government Resolution dated 06/04/2002 on the ground that as the petitioner has resigned the petitioner is not entitled to the pensionary benefits etc. . It is submitted that if the application of the petitioner is treated for voluntarily retirement, in that case, the petitioner shall be entitled to the pensionary benefits etc. as per the Government Resolution dated 06/04/2002 and, therefore, it is requested to allow the present Special Civil Application by directing the respondents to consider the application of the petitioner dated 23/06/2001 for voluntarily retirement and to pay pension, gratuity etc.