Sri Diwakar Alva vs The Union of India and Others

The legality and the correctness of the order passed by the learned single Judge in writ petition No. 2131/2002 dated 9th July, 2010, is called in question in this appeal. Heard the learned counsel for the parties. The appellant was an employee of the 2nd respondent Bank. He joined the Bank on 13-8-1973 as Trainee Officer. He was promoted from time to time. While he was working as Senior Manager on account of introduction of voluntary retirement Scheme 2000 by the 2nd respondent-bank dated 23-11-2010, the appellant applied for seeking voluntary retirement pursuant to the scheme on 31st January, 2001. The application filed by the appellant for grant of voluntary retirement was accepted by the Bank on 9-3-2001 and the same was communicated to the appellant on the same day. However, on 11-1-2002 the appellant intended to withdraw the application filed for voluntary retirement by sending one more application which application came to be rejected on the ground that when once an application seeking voluntary retirement is accepted the same cannot be permitted to be withdrawn at the instance of the appellant. The rejection of the application was challenged by the appellant before the learned single Judge challenging certain provisions of Vijaya Bank (Employees'') Voluntary Retirement Scheme 2000 as ultravires to certain provisions of the Constitution and to quash the endorsement issued by the Bank by permitting the appellant to continue in service till he attains the age of superannuation.

The learned single Judge after considering the arguments advanced by both the parties and relying upon the Judgment of the Hon''ble Supreme Court in the case of Vice Chairman and Managing Director A.P.S.I.D.C. Ltd. and Another Vs. R. Varaprasad and Others, and Punjab and Sind Bank and Another Vs. S. Ranveer Singh Bawa and Another, came to the conclusion that when once an employee has submitted an application seeking voluntary retirement he has no power to withdraw the same after acceptance. Relying upon the Judgments of the Apex Court the writ petition came to be dismissed.

Challenging the correctness of the same the present appeal is filed. We have heard the learned counsel for the learned counsel appearing for the parties. According to the learned counsel for the appellant the learned single Judge has wrongly considered the Judgment of the Hon''ble Supreme Court without considering the Judgment of the Apex court in the case of Shambhu Murari Sinha Vs. Project and Development India and Another, Therefore he requests the Court to reconsider the matter. After hearing the learned counsel for the appellant and the learned counsel for the respondent we have noticed the learned counsel for the appellant is not disputing the legal proposition laid down by the Hon''ble Supreme Court and the Judgments relied upon by the learned single Judge. The facts in the present case and the facts in the case of Punjab and Sind Bank and Another Vs. S. Ranveer Singh Bawa and Another, are similar and identical. The Hon''ble Supreme Court has ruled that when once an application is filed seeking voluntary retirement pursuant to agreement of Scheme it amounts to contract and the parties are bound by the same. This Courts cannot hold that the learned single Judge has committed an error in dismissing the writ petition. Under the circumstances, we do not see any merit in this appeal. Accordingly, the appeal is dismissed.