Prolonged Pre-Trial Detention and Right to Liberty Cannot Be Ignored” - Punjab & Haryana High Court Emphasizes Bail as the Rule Taxation Law | Andhra Pradesh High Court Rules Hotel’s Expenditures on Carpets, Mattresses, and Lampshades are Deductible as Current Expenditures Orissa High Court Upholds Disengagement of Teacher for Unauthorized Absence and Suppression of Facts In Disciplined Forces, Transfers are an Administrative Necessity; Judicial Interference is Limited to Cases of Proven Mala Fide: Patna High Court Act Of Judge, When Free From Oblique Motive, Cannot Be Questioned: Madhya Pradesh High Court Quashes Disciplinary Proceedings Against Additional Collector Registration Act | False Statements in Conveyance Documents Qualify for Prosecution Under Registration Act: Kerala High Court When Junior is Promoted, Senior’s Case Cannot be Deferred Unjustly: Karnataka High Court in Sealed Cover Promotion Dispute Medical Training Standards Cannot Be Lowered, Even for Disability’ in MBBS Admission Case: Delhi HC Suspicion, However Strong It May Be, Cannot Take Place Of Proof Beyond Reasonable Doubt: Himachal Pradesh High Court Upholds Acquittal No Detention Order Can Rely on Grounds Already Quashed: High Court Sets Precedent on Preventive Detention Limits Tenant's Claims of Hardship and Landlord's Alternate Accommodations Insufficient to Prevent Eviction: Allahabad HC Further Custodial Detention May Not Be Necessary: Calcutta High Court Grants Bail in Murder Case Citing Lack of Specific Evidence High Court, As A Constitutional Court Of Record, Possesses The Inherent Power To Correct Its Own Record: Bombay High Court A Fresh Section 11 Arbitration Petition Without Liberty Granted at the Time of Withdrawal is Not Maintainable: Supreme Court; Principles of Order 23 CPC Applied Adult Sexual Predators Ought Not To Be Dealt With Leniency Or Extended Misplaced Sympathy: Sikkim High Court Retired Employee Entitled to Interest on Delayed Leave Encashment Despite Absence of Statutory Provision: Delhi HC Punjab and Haryana High Court Grants Full Disability Pension and Service Element for Life to Army Veteran Taxation Law | Director Must Be Given Notice to Prove Lack of Negligence: Telangana High Court Quashes Order Against Director in Tax Recovery Case High Court of Uttarakhand Acquits Defendants in High-Profile Murder Case, Cites Lack of Evidence In Cases of Financial Distress, Imposing A Mandatory Deposit Under Negotiable Instruments Act May Jeopardize Appellant’s Right To Appeal: Rajasthan High Court Patna High Court Acquits Accused, Questions “Capacity of Victim to Make Coherent Statement” with 100% Burn Injuries High Court of Himachal Pradesh Dismisses Bail Plea in ₹200 Crore Scholarship Scam: Rajdeep Singh Case Execution of Conveyance Ends Arbitration Clause; Appeal for Arbitration Rejected: Bombay High Court

Service Law | Non-Communication of Resignation Acceptance Does Not Invalidate the Action If Rules Do Not Mandate Such Communication: Supreme Court

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


In a significant judgment on service law dated April 25, 2024, the Supreme Court of India upheld the decision of the High Court, which had ruled that non-communication of resignation acceptance does not invalidate the action if the rules governing the resignation do not require such communication to be made.

The apex court deliberated on the legal requirements concerning the acceptance and communication of an employee’s resignation under the Maharashtra Employees of Private Schools (Conditions of Service) Regulation Act, 1977 and its corresponding rules. The primary legal question revolved around whether the acceptance of a resignation needs to be communicated to the resigning employee for it to take effect.

The case arose from an appeal by Shriram Manohar Bande against the High Court’s decision which upheld the acceptance of his resignation by the management of Uktranti Mandal & Ors, despite his claims of wrongful termination and alleged fabrication of resignation acceptance documents. Bande had initially resigned and subsequently attempted to withdraw his resignation, which led to disputes over the legitimacy of the management’s actions.

Document Authenticity: The Supreme Court closely examined allegations of fabricated documents purportedly showing the acceptance of Bande’s resignation. The Court upheld the High Court’s finding that the management’s documentation was legitimate and not fabricated, affirming the authenticity of the resolutions passed by the school committee.

Acceptance and Communication of Resignation: The apex court affirmed the High Court’s interpretation that the non-communication of resignation acceptance does not render the resignation invalid when the governing rules do not mandate such communication. The Court noted, “the provisions of the MEPS Act and the corresponding rules do not necessitate that the acceptance of a resignation be communicated to be effective.”

Evaluation of Tribunal’s and High Court’s Findings: The Supreme Court found that the Tribunal had erred in its judgment by incorrectly determining the documents were fabricated without substantial evidence. The apex court praised the High Court’s meticulous examination of the records and upheld its decision, stating that the Tribunal’s conclusions were unfounded.

The Supreme Court dismissed the appeal, affirming the High Court’s decision and concluded that the management’s acceptance of Bande’s resignation was within legal bounds, and the appellant’s claims of involuntary resignation were unsubstantiated. The court dismissed the appeal with no order as to costs.

Date of Decision: April 25, 2024.

Shriram Manohar Bande versus Uktranti Mandal & Ors

Similar News