LAWS(BOM)-2008-10-21

CHANDRAKANT VISHRAM CHAVAN Vs. UNION OF INDIA

Decided On October 17, 2008
CHANDRAKANT VISHRAM CHAVAN Appellant
V/S
UNION OF INDIA Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By this petition, the petitioner is seeking benefit under the Voluntary retirement Scheme declared pursuant to a memorandum dated 26/08/1977. Few facts that are necessary to appreciate the grievance of the petitioner are narrated herein below.

(2.) The petitioner came to be appointed as a Trade Apprentice with the respondent no. 4. According to the petitioner, the training period was of four years which the petitioner successfully completed. After completion of the training period, the petitioner joined the regular service with the respondents w. e. f. 20/03/1963 as Plater Grade II. The respondents declared a Voluntary retirement Scheme in the year 1977. Pursuant to the scheme of voluntary retirement the petitioner made an application seeking voluntary retirement. In the said scheme one of the conditions stipulated for eligibility to claim voluntary retirement was that the Government servants who have completed 20 years of qualifying service alone would be entitled to claim voluntary retirement. The application moved by the petitioner seeking benefit of voluntary retirement came to be turned down by assigning the reason that as the petitioner has not completed the qualifying service necessary to make him eligible to claim voluntary retirement benefit, he cannot be extended the benefit of voluntary retirement. The Communication dated 17/02/1979 refusing voluntary retirement to the petitioner further reveals that the petitioner's Trade Apprenticeship period was not counted, as the period spent by the petitioner while undergoing the training, was not regular service rendered, more so, in a sanctioned post. Immediately on receipt of the letter dated 17/02/1979 refusing to grant the benefit of voluntary retirement, the petitioner shot back his reply by communication dated 19/02/1979, in the first place stating therein that the petitioner's four years of apprenticeship ought to have have been counted for the purpose of qualifying service and, secondly, the petitioner unequivocally declared that he has no alternative but to resign from service. A further prayer in that direction was to the effect that the communication dated 19/02/1979 be treated as a letter of resignation and the petitioner be relieved from service w. e. f. 1/04/1979. It is undisputed that the petitioner joined the service under Goa Shipyard Corporation w. e. f. 12/03/1979 i. e. even before severance of relationship of employer and employee between the petitioner and the respondent. Be as it may, the petitioner claims to have moved the higher authorities in regard to his claim for benefit under the voluntary retirement scheme, but the same was not favourably considered by any of the authorities.

(3.) For the reasons set out herein above, coupled with the fact that the grievance in the instant petition has been made belatedly after a period of about 25 years, we are constrained to dismiss the petition. Petition stands dismissed with no orders as to costs.