SADHAN DATTA Vs. STATE OF TRIPURA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD Mr. K. N. Bhattacharjee, learned Senior Counsel along with Mr. S. Acherjee, learned Advocate. Heard Mr. A. Ghosh, learned Counsel for the Respondents.

(2.) THE present Writ Appeal have been preferred against the Order dated 01. 07. 2005 passed in Writ petition 115 of 2001 (Dr. Sadhan Datta, Appellants Vs. The State of Tripura, Respondents) whereby the letter of resignation of appellant writ petitioner dated 31. 05. 1991 addressed to the Secretary to the Government of Tripura, Department of Health and Family Welfare was treated as resignation and not the conditional resignation as the same was accepted by the Governor by an order dated 13. 09. 1991 w. e. f. 1. 09. 1991, and after having been notified in the official Gazette, it was found to have been brought to the notice of all concerned including the writ petitioner and, therefore, no prejudice was said to have been caused to the writ petitioner and all his subsequent correspondences for leave and for acceptance of his voluntary retirement were treated as misplaced, and of no consequence and of no relevance as he ceased to be the member of the Tripura Health Service w. e. f. 1. 9. 1991.

(3.) IN order to adjudicate the present appeal it is necessary to give brief factual background. The appellant/ (Writ Petitioner) a Medical Officer in Grade-III of the Tripura Health Services (for short 'ths') was subsequently promoted as Head of Department of Gynecology in the Indira Gandhi Memorial Hospital for short IGM Hospital ). He was, however, not happy with the working condition of the said hospital and has gone on long leave on several occasions. He submitted a conditional resignation on 15. 5. 91 with expectations that the State respondents would remove difficulties and create congenial workable condition in the hospital for performing his duties properly, however, on 30. 5. 1991, the State respondents asked him to submit proper resignation addressed to the Secretary of the Department as his earlier conditional resignation was addressed to the Superintendent of the hospital, who was not the competent authority. Accordingly 31. 5. 1991, the appellant submitted another resignation letter dated 31. 5. 1991 addressed to the Secretary of the Department in continuation to his earlier resignation letter dated 15. 5. 1991. According to him, when he received no response to his resignation letters, he sent a notice of demand dated 3. 2. 1992 stating that in the department, there were no equipments, infrastructure and other materials, which were essential for running the department. By a letter dated 24. 2. 1992, the Joint Secretary of concerned Department expected from him to submit unconditional resignation within one month, else the department might initiate a disciplinary proceeding for his unauthorized absence. On 29. 4. 1992, the writ petitioner addressed a letter to the Joint Secretary of the department in reference the above letter dated 24. 2. 1992. On 5. 12. 1997, the writ petitioner again addressed a letter to the Secretary of the department showing his willingness to resume duties with further request to provide congenial atmosphere removing impediments and unfavourable situation in the hospital as pointed out by him earlier. On 10. 12. 1997, he resumed his duties bringing by letter dated 15. 12. 1997, to the notice of Director of Health Services also. Even after joining duties, the appellant was not comfortable with the working conditions. The writ petitioner's, request to the Chief Medical Officer on 15. 1. 1998 for issuing registration/licence for running the Nursing Home, was since declined, however, an another application in the name of his wife Smti Paramita Dutta seeking registration, for running home was allowed. However, on 16. 12. 1997, he sent a notice conveying his intention to go on voluntary retirement w. e. f. 1. 4. 1998 and had also applied for 30 days leave w. e. f. 16. 12. 1997 to 14. 1. 1998 to enable him to proceed to Kolkata for the treatment of his wife. On 30. 3. 1998, he again resumed his duties and on 31. 3. 1998, he relinquished his charge unilaterally on voluntary retirement, which took effect from 1. 4. 1998 though there was no acceptance of his notice for voluntary retirement.