EX CT. Manoj Yadav vs State Of Haryana And Others

Jagmohan Bansal, J

The petitioner through instant petition under Article 226/227 of the Constitution of India is seeking setting direction to respondent to treat his resignation as technical resignation.

The petitioner joined Haryana Police as Constable on 02.03.2019. HSSC by way of Advertisement No. 4/2024 invited applications for the post of Clerk. He sought permission from the department for applying for the said post which was accorded by the respondent-Department vide letter dated 05.07.2023. The petitioner cleared all the stages and came to be selected as Clerk in HSIIDC. He submitted resignation dated 20.10.2024 to the respondent. The respondent vide order dated 30.12.2024 accepted his resignation. He vide representation dated 03.01.2026 requested the respondent to consider his resignation as technical resignation but to no avail.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner applied against Advertisement No.4/2024 after seeking permission from the authorities. The respondent has wrongly withheld his technical resignation. The respondent in the case of similarly situated candidates has treated their resignation as technical resignation. This Court in Ravi Kumar vs State of Haryana, LawFinder Doc ID # 2761235 has adverted to similar situation and allowed writ petitions.

On being confronted with order passed by this Court in Ravi Kumar (supra), Mr. Akshit Pathania, Additional Advocate General, Haryana, who on advance notice is present in Court on behalf of respondent-State, assures the Court that competent authority would consider claim of the petitioner in the light of aforesaid judgment and pass an appropriate order within three months from today.

Learned counsel for the petitioner agrees to the aforesaid arrangement.

In the wake of statement of learned counsel for the parties, the petition stands disposed of.

Pending Misc. application(s), if any, shall also stand disposed of.