Jitendra Ray Goyal, J. - (1.) By way of this second appeal, appellant-defendants seek to challenge the judgment and decree dated 25/4/1992 passed by Additional District Judge No.6, Jaipur City, Jaipur in First Appeal No.28/1991 whereby he affirmed the judgment and decree dated 18/8/1990 passed in favour of plaintiff by Additional Civil Judge No.4, Jaipur City, Jaipur in Civil Suit No.50/1988.
(2.) The parties shall be referred hereinafter in the manner as they were arrayed in the plaint.
(3.) Brief relevant facts giving rise to this second appeal are that plaintiff filed a suit stating therein that plaintiff was degree holder in mechanical engineering; he was appointed by the defendant organisation on 6/12/1971 as Assistant Director and was confirmed on the said post on 6/12/1973 and on the basis of merit he was given promotion as Deputy Director (Junior) vide order dated 4-10-1976 and he was further promoted and confirmed on the post of Deputy Director (Senior) vide orders dated 15/10/1978 and 15/10/1980 respectively. According to the plaintiff, he was not properly considered for the post of Director Grade-II in spite of his good record and persons junior to him were promoted on 12/4/1983. It was his further case that on account of regular super-session, he remained perturbed and he had to proceed on leave from 30/3/1983 to 13/5/1983, thereafter again he got his leave sanctioned from 14/5/1983 to 11/11/1983 and ultimately he tendered his resignation from the service on account of wrong action of the defendant National Productivity Council and its officers. He sent his resignation with three months prior notice on 30/8/1983 by registered A.D. which was received by the defendants. It was further pleaded that he received a letter sent by Director of defendant organisation dated 27/29-10-1983 whereby he was informed that his resignation is illegal, he has remained absent from the duty and he did not join the duty despite of the fact that his leave has been cancelled which was sanctioned from 30/3/1983 and further he was directed to refund the salary which he had received from 30/3/1983 to April, 1983 and it was also conveyed that his resignation has been deemed w.e.f. 29-3-1983 afternoon and thus according to the plaintiff this whole action was wrong and illegal, therefore, a declaration was sought to the effect that the letter dated 27/29-10-1983 is illegal and void and prayer for issuance of mandatory injunction was also made that plaintiff be considered on the post of Director Grade-II from the date when his juniors were promoted.;