Laxmi Prasad Banjare vs State Of Chhattisgarh

By this petition, the petitioner is seeking the reliefs reproduced as under:-

“10.1 That, this Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to issue a suitable writ(s), order(s), direction(s) directing the Respondent Authorities to reinstate your petitioner’s service to the post of Siksha Karmi Grade-II, at Middle School Fulwari, Pali with all consequential service benefits.

10.2 That, this Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to issue a suitable writ(s), order(s), direction(s) by allowing the petitioner’s to revoke the resignation letter dated 20.02.2009 to allow petitioner to join the service to the post of Siksha Karmi Grade-II, at Middle School Fulwari, Pali, within a stipulated period, say as 6 months, in the interest of justice.

10.3 That, this Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to call the entire records from the respondents authorities for its kind perusal.

10.4 Any other relief, which may be suitable in the facts and circumstances of the case, may also be granted.”

Facts of the case in brief are that by order dated 03.07.2008 (Annexure P-1) the petitioner was appointed as Shiksha Karmi Grade II in Middle School, Fulwaripara, Block Pali, District Korba, on probation. He joined the said post on 22.07.2008 and discharged his duties. On 20.02.2009 he submitted his resignation (Annexure P-2) to respondent No. 5 on the ground of illness. However, on 09.03.2009 after recovery from illness the pe-titioner moved an application for revocation of the resignation vide (Annexure P-4). No response was however received by the petitioner on his revocation application from respondent No.5 either with regard to its acceptance or otherwise. Even subsequently, he kept on making representations till 2014 for withdrawal of his resignation, and when they all remained unresponded to, he filed this petition.

Reply on behalf of respondent No.5 was filed with the averment that the petitioner submitted his resignation on 20.02.2009 and surrendered one month’s salary as per clause 4 of the order of appointment but he has suppressed the fact about surrender of one month notice pay, therefore, his services were automatically terminated as per the clause 4 of the appointment order. Reply filed on behalf of respondent No.5 further says that as per clause 2.2 of the advertisement any candidate who is having two or more children out of them one born after 26.01.2001 will be ineligible for appointment. There was a complaint made against the petitioner that he is having four children, three of them were born after the cut off date i.e. 26.01.2001 and being so the petitioner is even otherwise not eligible for the post of Shiksha Karmi Grade II.

Counsel for the petitioner submits that within a short span of 18 days the petitioner withdrew his resignation and according to the applicable service Rules there cannot be an automatic termination of the services, and a specific order for that should have been passed. He submits that according to Rule 11 of the Chhattisgarh Panchayat Shiksha Karmi (Recruitment and Conditions of Services) Rules, 2007 (for short the “Rules of 2007”) the services of Shiksha Karmi can be terminated after a written notice of one month or paying salary of one month at any time by Appointing Authority. He further submits that since the resignation of the petitioner was never ac-cepted in writing and no express order for that was passed, it could not be assumed that there was an automatic acceptance of the resignation, and being so the petition may be allowed and the respondent No.5 may be directed to take back the petitioner into service on the post of Shiksha Karmi Grade II.

Counsel for the respondents/State as also counsel for respondent No.5 oppose the submission made by the counsel for the petitioner and submit that the petitioner is not entitled for the relief claimed by him. They submit that the petitioner was appointed on probation and therefore he had not attained the status of a permanent employee, therefore, it cannot be said that his resignation required any specific or express written order. They further submit that according to clause 2.2 of the advertisement published for appointment on the post of Shiksha Karmi Grade II, there was a condition that any candidate who is having two or more children and one of them being born after 26.01.2001 would not be eligible for the said post. They submit that along with the resignation the petitioner also submitted one month’s salary by way of challan in the treasury and this fact was suppressed by him and that this Court being Court of equity cannot grant any relief claimed by the petitioner. They submit that no rejoinder has been filed by the petitioner controverting the submissions contained in the return, and therefore, the petition is liable to be dismissed.

Heard counsel for the parties and perused the documents on record.

Admittedly, the petitioner was appointed as Shiksha Karmi Grade II by order dated 03.07.2008 and joined his duties on 22.07.2008. During this period he remained on probation which as per clause 2 of the appointment order was for a period of two years. Clause 4 of the appointment order clearly stipulates that in order to relinquish the post the Shiksha Karmi who is not in permanent service would either give one month prior notice to the appointing authority or will deposit one month salary. In this case, the petitioner gave his resignation on 20.02.2009 (Annexure P-2) and from the document of Annexure R-5/1 filed along with the return of respondent No.5 it is apparent that the petitioner deposited one month salary also. The reply of respondent No.5 also reveals that a complaint (Annexure R-5/3) was made against the petitioner that he has four children and three out of them were born after 26.01.2001. Perusal of clause 2.2 of the advertisement (Annexure R-5/2) clearly states that a candidate having two or more living children and one of them being born after 26.01.2001 would not be eligible for appoint-ment on the post of Shiksha Karmi Grade II.

As mentioned above, in the present case the petitioner submitted his resignation and also deposited one month’s salary in the treasury by way of challan. Thereafter he submitted an application for revocation of his resigna-tion followed by numerous representations for that purpose but they all did not receive any response from respondent No.5. It is a settled legal position that mere submission of representation would not give rise to the cause of action to take judicial recourse. In this view of the matter, the conclusion to be drawn by this Court can be that the petitioner having four children and three of them born after 26.1.2001 is not eligible for the post of Shiksha Karmi Grade II being in contravention of clause 2.2 of the advertisement. Another conclusion which can be drawn in this case is that the termination of the services of the petitioner was as a result of his tendering the resignation and depositing one month salary by way of challan in the treasury. These facts have not been disputed by either of the parties. Being so, this Court does not find any force in the present petition and therefore it is hereby dismissed.