Aparesh Kumar Singh, J. - (1.) HEARD learned counsel for the parties. Petitioner is seeking a direction upon the Respondent -Regional Provident Fund Commissioner -I, Employees' Provident Fund Organization, Regional Office at Ranchi for accepting his resignation from service tendered on 30th November, 2012. According to the petitioner, he was working as a Senior Social Security Assistant In the Office of Regional Provident Fund Commissioner -I, Ranchi and is only son of his parents, who are ailing. Therefore, he opted for his transfer from New Delhi and in the year 1997 he was transferred to Ranchi, since then he has been posted there. He made an application for voluntary retirement on 11th April, 2012 which was responded by Assistant Provident Fund Commissioner (Adm.), Regional Office, Ranchi stating that it cannot be accepted as he had not completed prescribed age limit and minimum qualifying service (Annexure -2 dated 30th April, 2012).
(2.) PETITIONER was again compelled to move an application for acceptance of his resignation through another letter dated 30th November, 2012, Annexure -7. Thereafter, he has approached this Court. From the averments made in the counter affidavit and the submissions of learned counsel for respondents, it appears that petitioner was imposed with a punishment vide order dated 30th May, 2012 passed by Respondent -Regional Provident Fund Commissioner -I, Ranchi. He again has been proceeded against in a departmental inquiry vide memorandum bearing No. 523 dated 22nd March, 2012. According to the respondents, no automatic acceptance of resignation on an application for voluntary retirement can be claimed as a matter of right as it is the discretion of the employer whether to accept the V.R.S. application or resignation as the petitioner has been facing departmental inquiry one after the other. Therefore, he cannot claim as a matter of right that his application for V.R.S. should be accepted.
(3.) COUNSEL for respondents also submits that resignation cannot be accepted when the petitioner is facing departmental inquiry. Having considered the rival submissions of the parties in the opinion of the court, a direction for accepting resignation of service of the petitioner tendered on 30th November, 2012 vide Annexure -7, cannot be issued if the petitioner has been facing departmental inquiry under the employer. Needless to say that claim for acceptance of an application for V.R.S. or even resignation is not automatic if the employer is proceeding against the employee concerned for misconduct. Therefore, no direction as such can be issued in the matter. Accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed.;