P.RAVIKUMAR Vs. DIRECTORATE OF TECHNICAL EDUCATION

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This writ appeal is directed against the order, dated 30.04.2010 made in W.P.No.17979 of 2009, whereby the writ petition filed by the petitioner/appellant challenging the order, dated 11.06.2007 passed by the first respondent and the subsequent order, dated 13.07.2007, passed by the second respondent thereby rejecting the request made by the writ petitioner to go on voluntary retirement and treating the same as resignation from service, was dismissed.

(2.) It is the case of the appellant that he joined in the second respondent college as a Lab Assistant (Physics Department) on 25.06.1984 and thereafter, his appointment was approved by the first respondent, as per order dated 19.10.1985. and subsequently, he was promoted as Junior Assistant on 16.07.1989 and thereafter, he was promoted as Assistant on 01.04.1996 and after completing 22 years of service, he has decided to go on voluntary retirement, which was accepted by the second respondent, who forwarded the letter given by the appellant, dated 18.12.2006, seeking permission to go on voluntary retirement, to the first respondent for approval. According to the appellant, as per the terms and conditions of the Voluntary Retirement Scheme, the respondents ought to have considered his letter seeking permission to go on voluntary retirement, within a period of 90 days and if there is any infirmity or defect in the said letter, they should have informed him about the same and if there is no communication sent by them within the stipulated time of 90 days, it must be deemed to have been approved by the respondents.

(3.) It is also the case of the appellant that further, in the letter, dated 18.12.2006, he has mentioned that the said letter may be treated as three months' notice given in advance and from that date, he has stopped attending the College. According to the appellant, he did not receive any communication from the respondents on his application seeking retirement under voluntary retirement scheme within the stipulated time and later, he received a letter, dated 13.07.2007 from the second respondent stating that they could not accept his request for voluntary retirement and the same could be treated as resignation from service, to which, the appellant sent a reply on 27.07.2007, stating that earlier he has submitted the letter dated 18.12.2006 only seeking permission to go on voluntary retirement and he never wanted to resign his job and if his request to go on voluntary retirement is not accepted, he could be allowed to continue the said job as Assistant.