Prayagraj, July 17: The Allahabad High Court said in one of its decisions that a government employee has the right to take voluntary retirement under CCS Rules 1972 after completing 30 years of service, provided he is not suspended.
Allahabad High Court in a decision has upheld the right to voluntary retirement of Dr. Shiv Pujan R. Singh, Superintendent of Post Office in Basti district, against the Union of India and others and upheld the order of CAT.
The primary legal issue in this case was whether Dr Shiv Pujan R. Singh had the right to voluntary retirement under Rule 48 of the Central Civil Services (Pension Rules), 1972 after completing 30 years of service, and whether the Union of India or the Central Government was justified in rejecting his request.
In a judgment delivered on July 16, 2024 by Chief Justice Arun Bhasali and Justice Vikas Budhwar, the writ petition filed by the Union of India has been dismissed. The court upheld the order of the Central Administrative Tribunal, which quashed the orders of March 31, 2014 and May 6, 2014 of the Central Government rejecting the voluntary retirement request of Dr Singh.
Regarding the right to voluntary retirement, the High Court emphasized that under Rule 48 of the CCS (Pension Rules), 1972, a government employee has the right to voluntary retirement after completing 30 years of service, provided they are not under suspension. The court said, โRule 48 gives the right to the retiring employee to claim voluntary retirement subject to two conditions. First, completion of 30 years satisfactorily and second, that the employee is not under suspension.
In its order, the high court said that while the employer has discretion under Rule 48A (which deals with 20 years of service), the employer’s approval is not necessary for retirement to become effective under Rule 48. “There is a clear distinction between the two provisions,” the court said.
The high court found that the disciplinary proceedings initiated against Dr Singh were initiated after his effective date of voluntary retirement, which is irrelevant to his retirement request. “The departmental charge sheet has been issued on October 10, 2013, much after the effective date of voluntary retirement, which is irrelevant,” the court said.
