IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA  CIVIL  APPELLATE JURISDICTION

   CIVIL APPEAL NO.472 OF 2007

JAYWANT BHAGUJI GADEKAR Appellant(s)

       Versus

BALALESHWAR SHIKSHAN MANDAL & ORS.  Respondent(s)

O R D E R

We have heard learned counsel for the parties.

This  appeal by special leave is  directed against the judgment and

order dated 10th June,  2003 passed  by the learned Single Judge of  the High

Court of Judicature at Bombay in Writ Petition No.6046 of 2002 whereby the

High Court  has  set  aside  the  order of  the  Tribunal  and  held  that  once  the

petitioner has sent the letter of resignation and the same has not been withdrawn,

therefore, it becomes final and the view taken by the Tribunal was not correct.

Aggrieved against this order the petitioner filed a Letters Patent Appeal but it was

rejected  on the ground that it  is  not  maintainable.   Hence the  petitioner has

approached this Court by way of a special leave petition challenging the order of

the  

...2/-

-2-

learned Single Judge dated 10th June,  2003.  Leave was granted by this Court.

The brief facts which are necessary for the disposal of this appeal are

that  the  appellant  was  appointed  as  Assistant  Teacher  in  the  Balaleshwar

Shikshan Mandal against a clear and permanent vacancy on probation.  Certain

complaints were received against the appellant from the students regarding his

misbehaviour.  In the wake of these complaints, the appellant tendered conditional

resignation on  16th August,  1998.   The  letter of  resignation was  sent  to  the

Chairman of the Institution. It  was alleged that since the allegations have been

levelled against him and he want to be absolved of the allegations, he tender his

resignation from the post and after an inquiry is held and he is exonerated, he may

be reinstated.  The letter of resignation dated 16th  August, 1998 reads as under :-  

“Due to  the various allegations levelled against the institution,  the

charges are orally levied upon me.  In that regard I  am held responsible for

adverse effect on the image of Institution and School.  Till the time of conclusion

of appropriate inquiry into the said charges, I

...3/-

-3-

am tendering resignation from my post.  If I am found innocent then I shall be

given an opportunity to discharge my duties.”

That was responded by the Institution by the communication dated

9th December,  1998  and  accepted  the  resignation  and  relieved  the  appellant.

Thereafter, on 11th December, 1998 the management revoked the letter dated 9th

December, 1998 accepting the resignation of the appellant.  The resultant position

is that normally he shall be treated to have restored to service as the management

has declined to accept the conditinal resignation.  The appellant did not approach

the management and filed a petition before the School Tribunal, Pune Region and

the Tribunal by its order dated 25th June, 2002 allowed the appeal of the appellant

and ordered that the impugned action of Respondent Nos. 1 and 2 of not allowing

the appellant to join duties by the end of the August, 1998 is hereby set aside.

The Respondent  Nos.  1  and 2  were directed to  reinstate the appellant as  an

Assistant Teacher with effect from 1st September, 1998 with full backwages.

This order was challenged by the School Management by filing a writ

petition before the High Court  

...4/-

-4-

and the learned Single Judge of the High Court after reviewing the matter came to

the conclusion that since the appellant has already resigned, therefore, there is no

right to continue in service.  In that context, the learned Single Judge ordered that

no specific letter has been adverted to by the Tribunal in its judgment nor that

letter has been made  available before this Court withdrawing the communication

dated 9.12.1998 and accepting the letter of resignation of the appellant.  We regret

that the view taken by the learned Single Judge of the High Court is not correct.

The appellant sent a letter of resignation with a condition that he is resigning till

an appropriate inquiry in the charges is made and if he is found innocent, then he

may be given opportunity to serve out as teacher.  The letter of resignation dated

16th August, 1998 was acceded to by the management by communication dated 9th

December, 1998 which  reads as under :-

“Your voluntary resignation letter dated 16.8.1998 tendered to this

Institution has been accepted in the Board Meeting  held on 29.11.1998.   The

Management is obliged to you for the services rendered by you to the institution

till this date.”

...5/-

-5-

But soon thereafter on 11th December, 1998 this letter was revoked

which reads as under :-

“Kindly treat the management's letter dated 9.12.1998 as cancelled.”

Therefore, the resultant position after review of the above mentioned

three letters is that the appellant's conditional resignation was accepted but it was

subsequently  revoked  on  11th December,  1998  meaning  thereby  that  the

appellant's letter of resignation by giving a condition was not accepted nor was it

communicated to him that your letter of resignation is accepted unconditionally.

Learned Single  Judge  of  the  High Court  has  observed that  letter dated  11th

December, 1998 was not referred to by the Tribunal nor was it placed before the

High Court but we regret to say that the letter of 11th December, 1998 is before us

and this find reference  in the order of the Tribunal.  The Tribunal has clearly

mentioned that “Besides, we have document on record to that the chairman of the

institujtion has issued letter dated 11.12.1998 i.e. after the alleged resignation was

given by the appellant, informing that the management's letter dated 9.12.1998 be

treated as cancelled.”

...6/-

-6-

Therefore,  the  letter  of  resignation,  the  communication  of  the

management dated  9.12.1998  and the letter dated  11.12.1998  were taken into

consideration  by  the  Tribunal  and  granted  a  relief  to  the  appellant  but

unfortunately, it seems that it has missed the attention of the High Court.   

Consequently, we set aside the order of the learned Single Judge and

remit this case back to the High Court to consider the effect of the revocation of

the letter of management dated 11th December, 1998 and reconsider the matter in

the light of the aforesaid letter of withdrawal.

The appeal is accordingly, allowed. The order dated 10th June, 2003

passed by the High Court is set aside   and the case is remitted back to the High

Court to decide the matter in accordance with law.

Since it is a matter of a teacher who has been out of job since 1998,

we request the High Court to expedite the hearing of the matter.

No order as to costs.

              ....................J.         (A.K.MATHUR)             

                          .....................J.           (P. SATHASIVAM)

New Delhi, July 30, 2008