Formal Relief Essential For Ceasing Employer-Employee Bond In Voluntary Retirement Cases: Jharkhand High Court Allows Reinstatement
The Jharkhand High Court held that until the employee receives official confirmation of the acceptance and is formally relieved from their duties, the legal bond between the employer and the employee remains intact ruling in favor of the petitioner who sought to withdraw his voluntary retirement request. The petitioner, a Forest Produce Inspector with 33 years of service, initially applied for voluntary retirement but later wished to retract his decision. Despite multiple appeals and even a court order, the respondent did not take any action until faced with a contempt case. They initiated proceedings but ultimately refused the petitioner's request for withdrawal and reinstatement. Subsequently, the petitioner filed a petition challenging this decision.
A Bench of Justice S.N. Pathak held that, “It is now settled legal position that unless the employee is relieved from the duty after acceptance of the offer of voluntary retirement or resignation, the jural relationship of employer-employee does not come to an end.”
Advocate Indrajit Sinha appeared for the Petitioner and Advocate Rupesh Singh appeared for the Respondents.
The Court referred to previous cases where intervening periods were considered "dies non," and permissions for withdrawal of retirement notices were granted only in case of material changes in circumstances. The Court emphasized the settled legal position that unless an employee is formally relieved from duty after the acceptance of voluntary retirement or resignation, the employer-employee relationship does not terminate.
The Court found , “the resignation of the petitioner was never notified and there was no severance in the relationship of employer-employee and the benefits of voluntary retirement were never accepted nor extended to the petitioner. In absence of all these ingredients, it can comfortably be said that it was open for the respondents to reconsider the case of petitioner for continuance into the service.”
The Court held “it is open for the respondents to allow the petitioner to withdraw himself from the Voluntary Retirement Scheme and by reinstating his service, extending him all the consequential benefits, for which he was entitled for, in accordance with law.” Consequently, the Court allowed the petition and quashed the impugned order, thereby granting the petitioner's request to withdraw his voluntary retirement.
Cause Title: Anil Kumar Sharma v. Jharkhand State Forest Development Corporation & Ors.
Click here to read/download Judgment
