YASH PAL KAILA Vs. STATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) LATE Shri Yash Pal Kaila had filed this writ petition challenging the orders passed by the Government rejecting his claim for pension. The claim was rejected on the ground that the petitioner had resigned from service. Under Rule 26 of the Central Civil Services (Pension) Rules, 1972 the consequence of resignation is forfeiture of service. True, there is a challenge to the rules but the Union of India is not a party. Be that as it may. It is submitted that those persons dismissed or removed from service and who tender resignation are not entitled to pension but in case of persons who voluntarily retire from service, they are entitled to pension. However, where a person unwittingly tenders resignation no pension is granted. But the fact remains that the government employee is governed by the CCS(Pension) Rules, 1972 and the Rules provide for forfeiture of past service.

(2.) SHRI Kaila expired in the year 2004. Now the petitioner is represented through the widow, who is the second additional petitioner. It is submitted that late SHRI Kaila, her husband had not taken a conscious decision to tender resignation. It is submitted that when late SHRI Kaila was asked to undergo sterilization operation, his moral conscience did not permit him to do so and without realizing the consequences only he tendered resignation. He could have very well applied for voluntary retirement in which case the matter would have been processed positively, having regard to the number of years of service. It is further submitted that there was no departmental proceedings pending against SHRI Kaila and in which case he would have been granted voluntary retirement. It is further submitted by the widow that ordinarily and in normal circumstances, no prudent employee would ever tender resignation, having had such a long service. Therefore, it is submitted that additional petitioner may be given an opportunity to make a representation to the first respondent to withdraw the resignation tendered by her late husband and convert the same as an application for voluntary retirement.

(3.) IN case the petitioner approaches the first respondent by way of an appropriate representation, the matter will be duly considered by the first respondent and action in accordance with law and justice shall be taken within a period of four months from the date of production of the copy of this judgment by the petitioner. It is made clear that the fact that late Shri Kaila could have tendered an application for voluntary retirement in which case the same would have been considered by the Government as per the rules, will also be considered while passing orders as above.