ANAND PARKASH Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB, ETC.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE Petitioner and Respondent 3 were selected by the Punjab Public Service Commission in 1957 as Temporary Engineers in P.W.D., Irrigation Branch, Punjab, which service they joined the same year. At the time of the re -organisation of that erstwhile State of Punjab, with effect from November, 1, 1966, they were allocated. to the State of Punjab. On October 31, 1966, Respondent 3 put in his resignation saying that he would like to be relieved after three months. According to the Service Rules, he was required to give three months notice if he wanted to resign his post or pay all the salary for three months. He preferred to give three months' notice. His resignation was accepted by the State Government on December* 31, 1966, and he was relieved of his post on January 31, 1967.

(2.) THIS sanction issues with the concurrence of Finance De -partment, - -vide their U.O. No. 4766 (7) -FR -67, dated 21st July, 1967.

(3.) THE learned Counsel for the Petitioner has submitted that according to Rule 4.19(a) of the Punjab Civil Services Rules, Volume II,. as was in force in 1967, the resignation of Respondent 3 entailed forfeiture of past service. This rule was deleted with effect from November 1, 1968, but was in force when the order accepting the resignation of Respondent 3 was passed. Therefore, under this rale, Respondent 3 forfeited his previous service. Rule 4.23, as was in force' in 1967, relates to the condonation of interruptions and deficiencies in service and, so far as relevant to this case, reads as Under: