AI Drafter 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2006 (8) TMI 601
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....s 1958. Sir, I have the honour to inform you that on personal grounds I would like to quit the Indian Police Service, on voluntary retirement, to which I was recruited on the basis of the examination held in 1974 and allotted to the Joint Cadre of Assam and Meghalaya, with 1975 as the year of allotment. Whereas, I will be completing 22 years of service as on the 16th July, 1997; I intend to voluntarily retire from service with effect from the 1st August, 1997 afternoon. Meanwhile, I would like to request you to kindly issue necessary directions so that my pension papers are processed and finalized as per existing rules, and oblige. Yours faithfully, Sd/- (A.K. Sahu)" He, however, did not receive any communication in regard to the acceptance of the said offer before the said date either from the Union of India from the State of Assam. The Government of Assam vide its letter dated 26th May, 1997, forwarded the said request of the appellant for its approval by the Ministry of Home Affairs. The Central Government referred the matter to the Joint Cadre Authority, which agreed to accept the request of the appellant to go on voluntary retirement without prejudice to the ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ho appeared in person, has raised the following contentions in support of this appeal : (i) In terms of the proviso appended to Rule 16 (2A), the State of Assam could not have accepted the offer of voluntary retirement; (ii) The offer of the appellant to retire voluntarily could have been accepted only prior to 1.8.1997 in terms of the circulars issued by the Central Government, as the employee has a right to withdraw the offer even after acceptance by the State Government; (iii) The respondents being public authorities, were bound to follow the Rules laid down by the Central Government which alone could have applied its mind to the request of the appellant and not the State of Assam. The learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondents, on the other hand, submitted that (i) The Central Government having approved the proposal of the Joint Cadre Authority, the requirements of the Rules have substantially been complied with; (ii) It was not necessary to accept the offer of the appellant on or before 1.8.1997 in view of the extant Rules; (iii) The appellant having withdrawn his offer only in 1999, i.e., much after acceptance of his offer, it was invalid in l....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....dia Services (Death-cum- Retirement-Benefits) Rules, 1958 (i) in the proviso to sub-rule (2), for the words "State Government concerned", the words "Central Government" shall be substituted; (ii) in the first proviso to sub-rule (2A), for the words "State Government concerned", the words "Central Government" shall be substituted." In view of the said amendment, thus, an offer of retirement made by a member of service requires acceptance by the Central Government and not by the State Government. The materials on records, as noticed hereinbefore, clearly point out that the authorities proceeded on the basis of the Rules prior to amendment. In terms of the amended Sub-rule (2A) of Rule 16, the offer of the appellant was required to be accepted by the Government of India and not by the Joint Cadre Authority. The question of application of mind by the Joint Cadre Authority for the purpose of acceptance of the said offer and/or approval thereof by the Government of India does not arise. At the first instance it was obligatory on the part of the competent authority of the Central Government to apply its own mind and pass an appropriate order. The competent authority could not hav....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... the statute. It can be given a retrospective effect. Even valid contract comes into being only after the offer is accepted and communicated. Where services of an employee are dispensed with, the order takes effect from the date when it is communicated and not from the date of passing of the order. {See State of Punjab vs. Amar Singh Harika [AIR (1966) SC 1313].} We are, however, not oblivious of the fact that under certain circumstances, the expression, "approval" would mean to accept as good or sufficient for the purpose of intent. Ratification is noun, of the verb "ratify". It means the act of ratifying, confirmation, and sanction. The expression "ratify" means to approve and accept formally. It means to conform, by expressing consent, approval or formal sanction. "Approve" means to have or express a favourable opinion of to accept as satisfactory. In the instant case, there was no question of any ratification involved as wrongly assumed by the High Court. {See Maharashtra State Mining Corpn. Vs. Sunil, s/o Pundikarao Pathak [(2006) 5 SCC 96].} We are, not concerned with such a case herein. We have made the aforementioned observations keeping in view the fact that if the Cent....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ect from 31st March, 1981. The appellant withdrew his offer seeking voluntary retirement by a letter dated 31st January, 1981. This Court held that he was entitled to do so and there was no valid reason to withhold the permission of the respondents stating : "We hold, therefore, that there was no valid reason for withholding the permission by the respondent. We hold further that there has been compliance with the guidelines because the appellant has indicated that there was a change in the circumstances, namely, the persistent and personal requests from the staff members and relations which changed his attitude towards continuing in government service and induced the appellant to withdraw the notice. In the modern and uncertain age it is very difficult to arrange one's future with any amount of certainty, a certain amount of flexibility is required, and if such flexibility does not jeopardize government or administration, administration should be graceful enough to respond and acknowledge the flexibility of human mind and attitude and allow the appellant to withdraw his letter of retirement in the facts and circumstances of this case. Much complications which had arisen coul....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....erse situation. The proviso appended to Sub-rule (2A) of Rule 16 mandates acceptance by the Central Government. It although does not specify a date for communicating such acceptance but ordinarily such acceptance should be within the period of notice so as to make cessation of contract of employment complete. We may observe that an appropriate order should be passed within a reasonable period. Normally, three months notice is required to be given as the said period is considered to be reasonable and it is expected that a decision would be taken within the said period. But the rule is not an inflexible one. It would depend upon the facts and circumstances of each case. The Appellant, as noticed hereinbefore, withdrew his offer only in 1999 by a letter dated 10.8.1999 which was impermissible as prior thereto the offer had already been accepted and a notification had also been issued. However, our findings aforementioned on the first contention of the appellant would not mean that we would exercise our discretionary jurisdiction in favour of the Appellant. The Appellant did not assign any specific reason as to why he intended to retire. Admittedly, a disciplinary proceeding w....