Gujarat High Court Case Information System
Print
LPA/504/2008 3/ 3 ORDER
IN
THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
LETTERS
PATENT APPEAL No. 504 of 2008
In
SPECIAL
CIVIL APPLICATION No. 23090 of 2007
=========================================================
C
R KORI - Appellant(s)
Versus
GUJARAT
WATER SUPPLY & SEWAGE BOARD THROUGH SECRETARY & 2 -
Respondent(s)
=========================================================
Appearance :
MR
PRABHAKAR UPADYAY for Appellant
None for
Respondent(s) : 1 -
3.
=========================================================
CORAM
:
HONOURABLE
MR.JUSTICE A.L.DAVE
and
HON'BLE
SMT. JUSTICE ABHILASHA KUMARI
Date
: 01/08/2008
ORAL
ORDER
(Per
: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE A.L.DAVE)
1. The
appellant is aggrieved by an order passed on 10th
September, 2007, in Special Civil Application No.23090 of 2007
dismissing his petition.
2. The
appellant was working with the respondent-authorities as a Fitter. He
tendered an application on 8th January, 2006, purporting
to be an application for voluntary retirement. Later on, by
communication dated 28th April, 2006, he indicated that
actually, his application dated 8th January, 2006, was for
voluntary resignation; the same may be read as such and his
resignation may be accepted with effect from 1st May,
2006. The respondent-authorities accordingly accepted the same.
Thereafter, all the dues, namely the amount of group insurance,
gratuity and CPF were paid to the petitioner-appellant, which he
accepted without any objection. Thereafter, he suddenly changed his
mind and requested to treat his resignation as an application for
voluntary retirement, which having not been accepted, he approached
with the petition, which also came to be dismissed by the learned
Single Judge after considering the above aspects.
3. We
have heard learned advocate Mr.Upadhyay and have considered the facts
of the case. The conduct of the petitioner-appellant clearly
indicates that he tendered resignation with a clear mind. He has
accepted his monetary benefits pursuant to resignation without any
objection and thereafter, after a long time, as a second thought, has
made an attempt to convert his resignation into voluntary retirement,
which cannot be permitted to be done. In the light of what is stated
above, we do not find any reason to interfere with the order of the
learned Single Judge.
The
Appeal, therefore, stands dismissed.
(A.L.Dave,
J.)
(Smt.Abhilasha Kumari, J.)
(sunil)
Top
