- (1.) CM No.11583 of 2014 Application for placing on record the reply, filed on behalf of the respondents, is allowed, subject to just exceptions. Reply is taken on record. CWP No.7923 of 2014
(2.) Challenge in the present writ petition is to the order dated 16.04.2014 (Annexure P4) whereby the petitioner's request for withdrawal of her voluntary retirement notice, before it became effective, has been rejected and she had been ordered to be relieved from duty w.e.f. 12.03.2014. Further prayer has been made to issue a writ in the nature of mandamus, directing the respondents to reinstate the petitioner in service as Associate Professor in the Department of Mathematics, with continuity of service and all consequential benefits and pay arrears of salary with interest @ 18% per annum.
(3.) The pleaded case of the petitioner is that the respondent-Institute is a deemed University under the Central Act, the National Institutes of Technology, Science Education & Research Act, 2007 (for short, the 'NIT Act') and is under the pervasive control of the Central Government. The petitioner had joined the respondent-Institute as Lecturer in the Department of Mathematics on 01.03.1993 and was selected and promoted as Lecturer (Selection Grade) w.e.f. 25.09.2006 and designated as Associate Professor w.e.f. 02.03.2008. She had been working to the entire satisfaction of the superiors and nothing adverse to her service was ever conveyed to her by the Institute. Due to unavoidable family circumstances, while working as an Associate Professor, she had served 3 months notice of voluntary retirement from service to respondent No.2-the Board of Governors, who was the appointing authority, on 12.12.2013 (Anneuxre P2). As per the notice, which was served under Rule 48-A of the Central Civil Service (Pension) Rules, 1972 (for short, the 'Pension Rules'), the resignation was to take effect from 12.03.2014. The said notice was served through proper channel through the Head of the Department, for onward transmission to respondent No.2. The compelling family circumstances having been settled in petitioner's favour, she withdrew the notice by writing a letter dated 19.02.2014 (Annexure P3) which was duly received by the Department on 20.02.2014 and forwarded to the competent authority on 21.02.2014 and thus, the notice was withdrawn well before 12.03.2014, i.e., the date from which the resignation was to take effect. She continued to perform her duty of teaching and research even after the purported date of retirement, i.e., 12.03.2014 right upto 21.04.2014, when she received the impugned order dated 16.04.2014, accepting her notice for voluntary retirement and rejecting the request for withdrawal of the same. The said order was signed by respondent No.4, the Director, by assuming himself to be the appointing authority of the petitioner but she continued to hold the charge of the post and accordingly, the action was challenged on the ground that the order had been passed usurping the powers of the Board of Governors and she had already applied for the withdrawal of the notice of voluntary retirement.;