TAI NIKIO Vs. STATE OF ARUNACHAL PRADESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By this writ petition, under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner has sought for a declaration that he has voluntarily retired from his service w.e.f 31.08.2018 as well as a direction to the respondent authorities to release him from service w.e.f. 01.09.2018 with all retirement benefits.

(2.) The fact, in a narrow campus, is that the petitioner joined as Junior Engineer in the Public Works Department, Arunachal Pradesh, (in short PWD) in the year 1991 and has completed 27 (twenty seven) years of service in the department. On temporary promotion, the petitioner was serving as Executive Engineer immediately before filing of this writ petition. Being desirous of contesting the Legislative Assembly Election-2019, he decided to voluntarily retire from service and exercised his right under Rule 48-A of the Central Civil Services (Pension) Rules, 1972 (hereinafter referred to as the CCS (Pension) Rules) and submitted an application, dated 30.04.2018, giving notice of voluntary retirement with a prayer that such voluntary retirement be made effective from 31.08.2018. The said notice has been annexed with the petition as Anexure-1. The Superintending Engineer, Yachuli Civil Circle, PWD, vide letter, dated 03.05.2018, forwarded the aforesaid notice of the petitioner for voluntary retirement to the Chief Engineer (Central Zone), PWD and the Chief Engineer, in turn, forwarded the same to the Commissioner, PWD on 07.05.2018, vide letter at page 18 and 20, respectively. The under Secretary, PWD, sought vigilance clearance in respect of the petitioner, vide Annexure- 3, at page 21, of the writ petition. Since no response was received, the under Secretary, PWD, vide letter dated 11.09.2018 (Annexure-4 at page 23), issued a reminder to the under Secretary, Vigilance, Government of Arunachal Pradesh to furnish the vigilance clearance of the petitioner for onward submission of same to the competent authority. As voluntary retirement is deemed to have come into effect upon completion of the notice period i.e., 31.08.2018 in terms of proviso to Sub-Rule 2 of Rule 48-A of the CCS (Pension) Rules, the petitioner submitted a representation on 03.10.2018, vide Annexure-5, to release him from service w.e.f. 31.08.2018. This representation, seeking release, evoked no response from the respondent authorities. Therefore, this writ petition seeking the declaration as well as the direction, indicated above.

(3.) The respondent No. 3, the Commissioner of PWD, filed an affidavit-in-opposition. Paragraphs 7 and 8 of the said affidavit-in-opposition are quoted below for convenience of appreciation.