RAJINDER BHUSHAN Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB

JUDGEMENT

(1.) BRIEF facts giving rise to this petition are that the petitioner joined as Assistant Press Operator in the office of the Chief Agricultural Officer on January 28, 1976. On January 27, 1992, he submitted his resignation in order to contest the Assembly elections. Along with the resignation, he deposited one month's pay and allowances amounting to Rs. 2,358/ -. On February 25, 1992, the petitioner applied for withdrawal of the resignation. His case is that before the resignation could be accepted, the letter of withdrawal of resignation had been received in the office of Director of Agriculture, respondent No. 2. According to the petitioner, respondent No. 2 accepted the resignation on March 5, 1992, without considering the request for withdrawal of the resignation. The petitioner seeks a direction in the nature of certiorari quashing the order accepting the resignation on March 5, 1992. by which time request for withdrawal of the resignation had been made to respondent No. 2. He further seeks a direction that he be deemed to be in service in terms of the provisions of Rule 7.5 of the Punjab Civil Services Rules, Volume -I, Part -I.

(2.) IN the written statement filed by the Chief Agricultural Officer, Sangur, on behalf of respondents 1 to 3, it has been stated that the only ground for the resignation was that the petitioner intended to contest the Assembly elections from Sunam constituency, It was further stated that the petitioner's request for withdrawal of the resignation, which bears the date February 25, 1992, was, in fact, received in the office of the Chief Agricultural Officer only on March 9, 1992, when it was duly entered in the receipt register against serial No. 1862 of that date. It has further been stated that the petitioner's resignation dated January 27, 1992, had been accepted by the competent authority i.e. Director of Agriculture respondent No. 2 on February 26, 1992, long before the receipt of the application for withdrawal of the resignation. It was denied that the petitioner had applied for withdrawal of the resignation to the competent authority prior to March 9, 1992. It has further been stated that the Director of Agricultural after considering the request for withdrawal of resignation sought a clarification from the State Government whether an employee who tendered resignation to contest election to the State Assembly and offered to withdraw the resignation after having lost the election, could be permitted to join. The Government, after considering the matter, replied in the negative and according the petitioner's request the withdraw the resignation was rejected.

(3.) MR . Malik has raised two contentions: His first contention is that the request for withdrawal had been delivered in the office of respondent No. 2 before petitioner's resignation was accepted. In other words, the contention is that the resignation stood withdrawn before it could be accepted and there was, thus, no occasion for respondent No. 2 to accept the resignation. His second contention is that assuming that the resignation has been accepted before request for its withdrawal was received by respondent No. 2, the case of the petitioner was squarely covered by the provisions of Rule 7.5 of the Punjab Civil Services Rules, Volume -I, Part -I, and as all the conditions laid down in that rule had been fulfilled the Director had little choice and he was bound to accept the withdrawal.