Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

There is no dispute to the fact that Smt.Manju Saraswat tendered resignation voluntarily and till today she had not withdrawn such resignation. There is also no dispute to the fact that the relevant time when the Managing Committee had accepted the said resignation, the said Managing Committee was in office both de facto and de jure by virtue of the interim order passed by the High Court in the writ proceeding in favour of the Managing Committee. In the aforesaid circumstances, the footing that the authorised controller had accepted the resignation tend by Smt. Manju Saraswat because the authorised controller was not in office at the relevant time when the voluntary resignation was accepted by the Managing Committee which was lawfully discharging the duties and functions of the Managing Committee. So far as the question of according approval by the Vice-Chancellor of the University is concerned, it may be pointed out that such approval is not contemplated under sub-section 3 of Section 35 of the Uttar Pradesh University Act, 1973 in the case of voluntary resignation by teacher. The said sub-section applies when decision to terminate the service of teacher whether by way of punishment or otherwise is taken by the management. If a teacher voluntarily tenders resignation and by that process withdraws from the service on own record, the question of termination of service does not arise. In this connection, reference may made to the decision of this Court in J.K. Cotton Spinning and Weaving Mills Co. Ltd. Vs. State of U.P. (1990 (44) SCC 27). It has been held in the said decision that if an employee voluntarily tenders resignation, it becomes an act of the employee who chooses to voluntarily give up job. Therefore, such situation will be covered by the expression voluntary retirement within the meaning of clause I of Section 2 (a) of U.P. Industrial Disputes Act, 1947. It has also been indicated in the said decision that if the resignation is not voluntarily but it is tendered on account of coersion, such resignation cannot be held to be voluntary act of the employee expressly deciding to withdraw from service.