P PALANISAMY Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD both sides. The petitioner has come forward to file the present writ petition seeking to challenge the order dated 31. 8. 2007 passed by the fourth respondent. By the said order, the petitioner was informed that the withdrawal of notice to go on voluntary retirement given by the petitioner by letter, dated 17. 8. 2007 was considered and rejected by the competent authority. It was also informed that the voluntary retirement, dated 1. 9. 2007 was accepted earlier by the order of the department, dated 25. 7. 2007 will stand. Therefore, the petitioner should accept the fact that he had been voluntarily retired on the date notified without any further correspondence on the subject.

(2.) THE case of the petitioner was that he joined CRPF on 17. 7. 1985 at Group Centre, Avadi, Chennai. After completion of 22 years of service, because of domestic problem, he submitted an application for voluntary retirement. He gave an application on 28. 6. 2007, seeking permission to retire with effect from 1. 11. 2007. Since notice period was fixed beyond three months, the said request was not accepted. The petitioner, thereafter, submitted another application on 23. 7. 2007 to permit him to go on voluntary retirement from service from 1. 9. 2007.

(3.) IT is claimed by the petitioner that after about 3-1/2 weeks, the petitioner sent a letter, dated 17. 8. 2007, withdrawing the earlier letter seeking permission to go on voluntary retirement because of some changed circumstances. However, the fourth respondent, by a letter, dated 25. 7. 2007 had passed an order accepting his application for voluntary retirement with effect from 1. 9. 2007. When the petitioner further made correspondence, the fourth respondent rejected the request for withdrawal of notice.