State Has Right To Reject Application For Voluntary Retirement On The Grounds Of Public Interest: Calcutta High Court
The Calcutta High Court has held that the State has the right to reject an application for voluntary retirement on the grounds of public interest.
The Court allowed the State’s Petition challenging the order of the Administrative Tribunal (Tribunal) wherein it was held that the right to voluntary retirement commences as soon as mandatory requirements of Rule 75 are fulfilled and was not affected by the insertion of Sub Rule 75 (aaaa) of the West Bengal Service Rules Part I (1971 Rules).
The Bench comprising Justice Debangsu Basak and Justice Md. Shabbar Rashidi observed, “Even independently, State has the right to adjudge an application for voluntary retirement on the touchstone of public interest and decide thereon”.
Additional Government Pleader Tapan Kumar Mukherjee appeared for the Petitioners, and Senior Advocate Bikash Ranjan Bhattacharyya appeared for Respondents no 1 and 2.
Two individuals initiated an application before the Administrative Tribunal (Tribunal) by an applicant who was a medical officer and had submitted a request for voluntary retirement. Still, the authorities asked for additional documents before rejecting the request. The second applicant was an association of Health Services Doctors who joined the first applicant in the original application. The Tribunal ruled that an individual's right to retire voluntarily from their job begins as soon as they fulfill all the requirements outlined in Rule 75 of the 1971 Rules. Therefore, anyone who meets these requirements can retire voluntarily, regardless of whether they submitted a notice before the new subrule was added. They can retire according to subrule 75 (aaa) of the 1971 Rules, and the new subrule 75 (aaaa) does not apply to them. The State approached the Court by way of a Writ Petition challenging the order of the Tribunal.
The Court disagreed with the Tribunal's interpretation and noted that while a right may have been gained before the insertion, it must be exercised prior to the effective date of the notifications. Additionally, the Court held that the State has the right to judge a voluntary retirement application based on public interest and make a decision.
“The Tribunal in the impugned order has held that, the right to apply for voluntary retirement had accrued to an incumbent on the date of his joining in the service and therefore, such right can be exercised despite the insertion of the notification dated February 7, 2014. We are however, unable to accept such a proposition in view of the fact that, a right may have accrued prior to the insertion but such right has to be exercised prior in point of time than the coming into effect of the notification dated February 7, 2014”, the Bench noted.
Accordingly, the Court set aside the impugned order and allowed the Petition.
Cause Title: The State of West Bengal & Others v Dr. Ashok Kumar Maiti & Others.
