(1.) A short controversy raised in this writ petition relates to the legality of the order dated 24.1.1994 (Annexure P-5) passed by the Chief Town Planner, Punjab (respondent No.2) rejecting the application filed by the petitioner on 6.10.1994 seeking withdrawal of an earlier application filed by him for voluntary retirement.
(2.) The brief facts which are necessary for the purpose of making an adjudication of the claim of the petitioner are that the petitioner had submitted an application for voluntary retirement on 20.12.1993. That application was withdrawn by him and his request was accepted by the competent authority on 7.2.1994 before any order could be made on the first application submitted by the petitioner. After about six months the petitioner once again made an application dated 26.7.1994 seeking voluntary retirement from service with effect from the date of expiry of three months period. This application of the petitioner was accepted by the Chief Town Planner, Punjab (respondent No.2) on 7.8.1994 who ordered that the petitioner shall stand retired with effect from 27.10.1994 (A.N.). However, before that day could arrive, the petitioner made an application seeking to withdraw his request for voluntary retirement. This application has been rejected by respondent No.2 vide Annexure P-5.
(3.) The petitioner has assailed Annexure P-5 on the ground of arbitrariness and absence of reasons. The contention of the petitioner is that in terms of Rule 39 of the Punjab Civil Services (Premature Retirement) Rules, 1975 , he had a right to seek withdrawal of the application for voluntary retirement before the expiry of notice period indicated by him in his original application and the competent authority was not vested with the discretion to decline the request of the petitioner. The petitioner has pleaded that till 27.10.1994, relationship of master and servant existed between him and the Government and he had every right to withdraw his request for voluntary retirement.