ANJAN CHAKRABORTY Vs. THE CHIEF SECRETARY TO THE GOVT. OF MEGHALAYA AND ORS.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Mr. B.K. Deb Roy, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. ND Chullai, learned Sr. GA assisted by Mr. S Sen Gupta, learned GA appearing for the respondents.

(2.) The core question calls for decision in the present writ petition is as to whether the question of non-acceptance or acceptance of voluntary retirement of the petitioner after completing the statutory notice of 3 (three) months for voluntary retirement by the authority arises or not? As, this question is to be answered by referring to the FR 57 of the Meghalaya Fundamental Rules and Subsidiary Rules, 1984. It would be more profitable to quote FR 57 hereunder:-

(3.) The concise fact of the case, sufficient for deciding the above core question, calls for decision in this writ petition is noted. The petitioner was initially appointed as Constable in the Meghalaya Police in the year 1978 and gradually promoted to the post of Inspector of Police (CID), HQ, Meghalaya. The petitioner, after completing of 35 years of service with the best of his ability and satisfaction of the concerned authority, the petitioner applied for voluntary retirement by giving 3 (three) months notice under FR 57 (c) of the Meghalaya Fundamental Rules and Subsidiary Rules, 1984 (for short 'Meghalaya FR and SR, 1984'). It is categorically pleaded in the present writ petition that under FR 57 (c) of the Meghalaya FR and SR, 1984, the competent authority is under obligation to accept the voluntary retirement after completing 3 (three) months' notice. The said application of the petitioner for voluntary retirement dated 01.11.2013 (Annexure I to the writ petition) is quoted hereunder:-