Case Note & Summary
The petitioner, S. Meenakshi, was appointed as a Woman Police Constable Grade-II in the Tamil Nadu Special Police VI Battalion on 14.04.2005. Due to family circumstances, including her mother's illness and work-related stress, she tendered her resignation on 23.11.2006 and submitted it during a grievance day meeting on 28.11.2006. She alleged that on the same day, she withdrew her resignation in writing upon the advice of the fourth respondent, the Commandant. However, the fourth respondent accepted her resignation on 15.12.2006 with immediate effect and informed her that she would not be taken back. Despite submitting apology letters and representations to higher authorities, her request for reappointment was rejected, communicated to her on 26.09.2007. The petitioner filed a writ petition in 2019 under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, seeking to quash the acceptance order dated 15.12.2006, the memo dated 26.09.2007, and an endorsement dated 02.10.2018, and to be reinstated with consequential benefits. The core legal issue was whether the acceptance of resignation was valid when the petitioner claimed to have withdrawn it before acceptance, and whether the authorities had followed the procedure under Rule 36(A) of the Tamil Nadu Special Police Subordinate Service Rules, 1978, which prescribes a three-month notice period for resignation. The petitioner argued that the acceptance was hasty and contrary to the rules, while the respondents contended that under Rule 36(A)(b), withdrawal of resignation is not permitted after acceptance by the appointing authority. The court extracted Rule 36(A)(b) which states that a member may withdraw the notice of resignation before its acceptance, and withdrawal will not be permitted after acceptance. The court found that the petitioner's resignation was accepted on 15.12.2006 and served on her on 18.12.2006. It held that as per the rule, withdrawal was not permitted after acceptance, and the fourth respondent had acted in accordance with the rules. Accordingly, the court dismissed the writ petition as devoid of merit, implying that the acceptance of resignation was valid and the petitioner had no right to reinstatement.
Headnote
A) Service Law - Resignation and Withdrawal - Withdrawal of resignation not permitted after acceptance by appointing authority - Tamil Nadu Special Police Subordinate Service Rules, 1978, Rule 36(A)(b) - The petitioner, a Woman Police Constable, submitted resignation on 28.11.2006 due to family circumstances; she claimed to have withdrawn it the same day, but the resignation was accepted on 15.12.2006. The Court held that under Rule 36(A)(b), withdrawal of resignation is allowed only before acceptance, and not after acceptance by the appointing authority. Since the acceptance had been made, the subsequent withdrawal was impermissible, and the dismissal of the writ petition was upheld. (Paras 6-9)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the acceptance of the petitioner's resignation was valid in light of Rule 36(A) of the Tamil Nadu Special Police Subordinate Service Rules, 1978, and whether the petitioner's withdrawal of resignation before acceptance was required to be considered
Final Decision
Writ petition dismissed as devoid of merit. No costs.
Law Points
- Legal points not extracted
- withdrawal of resignation not permitted after acceptance by appointing authority under Rule 36(A)(b) of Tamil Nadu Special Police Subordinate Service Rules
- 1978
