SUNIL DUTT Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB AND OTHERS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Brief facts of the case are that the petitioner had joined services with the Punjab State Education Department as a Teacher on 6.3.1992. In the month of August 2012, the petitioner applied for three months' leave to proceed abroad on the ground that the family of the petitioner had shifted to the United States of America and that his wife was unwell and his children were to be admitted to the schools in foreign land. It is further pleaded that the leave of the petitioner was not sanctioned by the department upto 31.8.2012. Accordingly, the petitioner submitted an application seeking voluntary retirement on 31.8.2012 by serving three months' notice i.e. from 31.8.2012 to 30.11.2012 as was the requirement under the relevant Rules governing the subject of pre-mature retirement. It is further asserted that the petitioner had deposited two months salary pertaining to the months of October and November 2012 and accordingly requested the respondents to relieve him w.e.f. 30.09.2012. On 30.9.2012, the petitioner was relieved from service. Placed on record is order dated 24.10.2012 passed by the Secretary to Government Punjab Department of School Education at Annexure P/5, whereby sanction has been accorded under the Punjab Civil Services (Pre-Mature Retirement) Rules, 1975 as regards voluntary retirement of the petitioner while serving as Lecturer Biology w.e.f. 30.09.2012 (after noon) on account of domestic circumstances. The instant writ petition has been filed praying for the issuance of a writ in the nature of mandamus for directing the respondents to allow the petitioner to rejoin the duties as Lecturer in Biology and consequently to permit him to serve the department till he reaches normal date of superannuation which is 31.5.2022. Further prayer is for directing the respondents to treat the period from 1.10.2012 till the petitioner is permitted to rejoin, as leave of the kind due.

(2.) Learned counsel for the petitioner would vehemently argue that the request seeking voluntary retirement had been made by the petitioner under compelling circumstances. Learned counsel would advert to the application dated 31.08.2011 (Annexure P/1) to submit that the petitioner had mentioned therein that his family had shifted abroad and on account of the fact that his wife was feeling unwell and his children were to be admitted in educational institution abroad and coupled with the circumstances that his leave was not being sanctioned, a request for voluntary retirement had been made. Learned counsel would submit that such request would be construed as a conditional request seeking voluntary retirement and as it was open to the petitioner claim reinstatement.

(3.) Having heard learned counsel for the petitioner at length, I am of the considered view that the claim and the prayer made by the petitioner in the instant writ petition does not merit acceptance.