(A) Constitution of India, Article 14 – Maharashtra Universities Act, 1994 Section 59(1), 59(2) – Service Law – Withdrawal of prospective resignation – In resignation letter dated 25.03.2003 the appellant requested to accept her resignation from future date w.e.f. 24.09.2003 due to medical reasons – Vide letter dated 28.03.2003, the management demanded unconditional resignation of appellant waiving the 6 months’ notice period by mutual consent, which was not agreed and a reply was submitted on 31.03.2003 justifying the resignation from a prospective date – Vide letter dated 08.04.2003 the resignation dated 25.03.2003 was accepted from a prospective date ‘unilaterally’ using the words “final, binding and irrevocable” – The averments in the letter dated 11.08.2003, which is after date of acceptance of resignation does not disclose any implied agreement to the contents of the letter dated 08.04.2003 – Judgment of Rev. Oswald relied upon to non-suit the appellant does not apply to the facts of the present case – There was no implied contract and understanding with prior consent – Therefore, the withdrawal of such resignation by appellant prior to the effective date is permissible – Impugned judgments of Court below liable to be set aside.(Para 19, 21, 27)
(B) Constitution of India, Article 14 – Maharashtra Universities Act, 1994, Section 59(1), 59(2) – Service Law – Resignation – Withdrawal of prospective resignation – During pendency of litigation before the High Court, the appellant got selected on the post of Principal in M.P.P. Shah College and on joining duty on 01.10.2007 worked till attaining the age of superannuation i.e., 31.10.2015 – Thus, because of the setting-aside of the orders impugned and due to the superannuation, she cannot now be allowed to join the duty in the respondent No. 1 institution – Simultaneously, it would not be appropriate to give liberty to the Trust to initiate departmental action for the allegations as raised in the letter of Trustee dated 05.03.2003, especially after a lapse of more than 20 years, in particular when the appellant had already attained the age of superannuation in 2015 -Deem it appropriate to direct the Trust to regularize the service period of the appellant from 24.09.2003 (when they wrongly treated the appellant as having resigned) till the date of joining the duty at the new Institution as Principal on 01.10.2007 – Principle of ‘no work no pay’ would apply and the appellant would not be entitled to backwages and salary for such regularized period, as she has not worked with the Trust -In view of her deemed continuance the period from 24.09.2003 to 01.10.2007 would be regularized by the respondent and be counted as period spent on duty for all purposes including pension. (Para 29)
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
2024 STPL(Web) 111 SC
[2024 INSC 127]
Dr. Mrs. Suman V. Jain Vs. Marwadi Sammelan Through Its Secretary And Others
Civil appeal no. 1480 of 2012-Decided on 20-2-2024
https://stpllaw.in/wp-content/uploads/2024/04/2024-STPLWeb-111-SC.pdf
