Tilakram Verma v. State Of Chhattisgarh

-1NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR WPS No. 3647 of 2018 Tilakram Verma S/o Shree Ramchandra Verma, Aged About 36 Years R/o Village Thakurtola, Post Ramatola, Police Station Boratlav, District Rajnandgaon Chhattisgarh ---- Petitioner

Versus

1. State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary, Department Of Home (Police), Mantralaya, Mahanadi Bhawan, New Raipur, District Raipur Chhattisgarh., District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh

2. The Director General Of Police, Police Head Quarters, Civil Lines, Raipur Chhattisgarh., District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh

3. Inspector General Of Police, Rajnandgaon Range, District Rajnandgaon Chhattisgarh., District : Rajnandgaon, Chhattisgarh

4. Superintendent Of Police, District Rajnandgaon Chhattisgarh., District : Rajnandgaon, Chhattisgarh --- Respondents For Petitioner :

Shri Parag Kotecha, Advocate For Respondent/State :

Shri Dhiraj Wankhede, G.A.

S.B.

Hon'ble Shri Justice Manindra Mohan Shrivastava Order On Board 14/05/2018 Heard.

1.

The petitioner seeks to challenge the action of the respondents in accepting his resignation and thereafter rejecting his representation for reinstatement in service.

2.

The fact is not in dispute as unfolded from the records of the case is that for the reasons of sickness, the petitioner decided to quit service, gave a notice of resignation way back in the year 2010, the same was accepted and the petitioner was permitted to resign from service. 3.

After more than 6 years, the petitioner gave a rethought to his decision and started making representation that he may be reinstated. The authorities

-2having found it to be a stale matter rejected the representation. 4.

According to learned counsel for the petitioner, once petitioner decides to seek reinstate to service, his case was required to be examined and in the absence of any impediment, he ought to be reinstated in service. 5.

This Court does not find any merit in submission. The petitioner had opted to resign from service for certain reasons. The acceptance of resignation was never challenged. The petitioner's attempt to seek reinstatement six years after his resignation, is not backed by any legal right to seek reinstatement in such matter. It is not a case where before acceptance of the resignation, the same was withdrawn.

6.

Therefore, the petition has no merit and the same is accordingly dismissed.

Sd/- (Manindra Mohan Shrivastava) Judge Rekha