RSMML AND ORS. Vs. SANJAY KUMAR
LAWS(RAJ)-2015-2-14
HIGH COURT OF RAJASTHAN
Decided on February 06,2015

Rsmml And Ors. Appellant
VERSUS
SANJAY KUMAR Respondents

JUDGEMENT

- (1.) BOTH the special appeals are filed by the appellant Rajasthan State Mines and Minerals Limited, Udaipur to challenge the common judgment dated 24.1.2014 passed in SBCWP Nos. 1998/2012 and 4871/2011 filed by the respondent Sanjay Kumar.
(2.) AS per the facts of the case, the respondent -petitioner was working as Assistant Manager (Marketing) in the office of respondents and he applied for voluntary retirement from service w.e.f. 30.4.2009 as he joined some job in the USA. The appellant company sent communication dated 3.12.2009 to the respondent Sanjay Kumar and informed that his VRS application has not been accepted. Therefore, being aggrieved and dissatisfied with the said communication, Sanjay Kumar preferred writ petition before this Court and same was registered as SBCWP No. 4871/2011.
(3.) DURING the pendency of above writ petition, the appellant RSMML initiated disciplinary action against the petitioner. Against that action, the petitioner again approached this Court by way of filing SBCWP No. 1998/2012. The learned Single Judge heard both the writ petitions and decided both the writ petitions by common order, which are impugned in both the special appeals. The learned Single Judge after hearing both the parties passed the following order, which reads as under: - "5. Having heard the learned counsel for the parties, this Court is of the opinion that he communication (Annex. 10) dated 03.12.2009 cannot amount to the rejection of VRS application as it clearly states that the competent authority has not considered the application for grant of VRS. It means that the VRS application has not been rejected on any cogent ground after giving of opportunity of being heard to the petitioner. Therefore, in view of the fact that the petitioner is not inclined to join back the services of the respondent, and is already serving at USA, and is said to have settled there, it is considered appropriate that the respondent, RSMML should re -consider the application for VRS of the petitioner objectively and fairly; and the said application for VRS be accepted by them even now and his retiral dues may also be released as computed by the respondents themselves vide Annex. 11, referred above, of Rs. 8,14,204/ -. The aforesaid sum, however, will not carry any interest and the respondents may pay the said sum within a period of six months from today. 6. It is ordered accordingly and the writ petitions are disposed of. No costs. A copy of this order be sent to the concerned parties forthwith." ;


Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.