DEEN DAYAL Vs. STATE OF U.P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Sri L.P. Singh, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri Ran Vijay Singh, learned Addl. Chief Standing Counsel for the State-respondents.

(2.) By means of this petition, the petitioner has assailed the order dtd. 20/9/2019 passed by the Sub Divisional Officer, Hasanganj, Unnao rejecting the claim of the petitioner regarding payment of retiral dues.

(3.) As per the impugned order, the petitioner was initially appointed on the post of Lekhpal in the year 1953 and he discharged his duties as Lekhpal till 1975. While discharging the duties of Lekhpal, the petitioner had discharged the services of Assistant Registrar, Kanoongo as an officiating basis w.e.f. 1975 to the year 1980. However, the petitioner was placed under suspension on 29/11/1979 and a charge sheet has been issued on 19/4/1980. The petitioner opted not to reply the charge sheet and submitted his resignation on 28/4/1980. The reason assigned in the resignation letter is that the petitioner was willing to contest the election of Legislative Assembly, therefore, he requested that his resignation be accepted. Accordingly, resignation of the petitioner has been accepted. Thereafter, the petitioner claimed that since his resignation has been accepted, therefore he be paid pension and other retiral benefits. The competent authority has rejected said claim of the petitioner placing reliance upon the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in re; Senior Divisional Manager, Life Insurance Corporation of India and others v. Shree Lal Meena, (2019) 4 SCC 479.