N K JAGNANI Vs. BIHAR STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner N. K. Jagnani on the basis of his application under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India obtained a rule from this Court. In the application he has prayed for quashing the resolution dated the 2nd May, 1974, (annexure '6') passed by the respondent and also under the supplementary application the petitioner has prayed for quashing the order dated 9-5-1974, (annexure '7') passed by the respondent. The relevant portion of the order in annexure '7' read as :

(2.) In order to appreciate the point involved in the application it would be necessary to state briefly the facts. The petitioner was appointed as Electrical Engineer Assistant under the respondent with effect from 15th September, 1962. The petitioner was thereafter promoted as Assistant Electrical Engineer by a Notification dated the 4th December, 1964, a portion of which has been annexed by the petitioner as annexure '1' to the application. The entire Notification has been placed on the record by the respondent annexed as annexure 'A' to the counter-affidavit, filed by the respondent. As stated by the petitioner he served under the respondent at different places as Assistant Electrical Engineer up to the 6th June, 1972. Thereafter the petitioner's father fell ill, and on that account the petitioner proceeded on leave for one month with effect from 7th of June, 1972. Due to the serious illness of his father which continued for some time the petitioner extended his leave from time to time till 30th November, 1972. The petitioner further stated in his application that due to family trouble particularly due to the illness of his father, the petitioner found difficulty in continuing in service under the respondent, and hence he tendered his resignation under his letter dated the 29th November, 1972, a true copy of the resignation letter is marked annexure '2' to the application. Under annexure '2' the petitioner had requested, the respondent that his resignation should be accepted on or before the 31st December, 1972. The petitioner did not receive any reply accepting the resignation of the petitioner, from the respondent by the 31st December, 1972. The petitioner however subsequently received an order dated the 9th May, 1974 from the respondent which has been quoted earlier under annexure '7' intimating therein that the resignation of the petitioner was accepted with effect from 31st of December, 1972. Before receiving the order contained in annexure '7', the petitioner by his letter dated 2nd August, 1973 (annexure '4') withdrew his resignation and reported himself to duty on the same date. In the said letter he had also requested the respondent to accept his joining report and to treat the petitioner's letter of resignation dated the 29th November, 1972 as having been withdrawn. In the application the petitioner has also annexed a copy of his joining report dated 2nd August, 1973 as annexure '3'. Thereafter the petitioner attended the office of the respondent regularly from day to day with effect from 2nd August, 1973 and as stated by him, he continued attending the office till 2nd of May, 1974 when he learnt about the resolution passed by the respondent contained in annexure '6'. Subsequently on the 8th of September, 1973, the petitioner wrote a letter to the respondent, a true copy of the said letter is marked annexure '10' requesting thereunder to accept the letter of withdrawal of his resignation. Under the letters of 3rd September, 1973 (annexure '9') and of 8th April, 1974 (annexure '5') the petitioner complained, to the respondent that in spite of joining his duty the petitioner was not given his emoluments and therefore he requested that necessary orders might be passed to pay his salary and allowance etc. But instead of replying to his various letters the respondent passed the resolution contained in annexure '6' and the order contained in annexure '7'.

(3.) The respondent after receiving the notice of the application of the petitioner in this Court, filed a counter-affidavit. Thereafter the petitioner filed a reply to the counter-affidavit on the 16th August, 1974.