The petitioner while employed as a Charge Hand Miraj Rebuild Factory, KAMRA, tendered his resignation which was not accepted by the respondents vide order dated 28.12.2006..
2. Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that the respondent had no lawful authority to refuse to accept the resignation without stating any reasons. According to the learned counsel the settled proposition is that an employer is bound to accept the resignation and cannot compel an employee to continue unless and until there are some compelling grounds for the same and these are the pendency or expected commencement of disciplinary proceedings against the employee.
Learned Federal Counsel has made his submissions in a very fair and up-right manner and has drawn my attention to the judgment in the case of Chairman, Pakistan Space and Upper Atmosphere Research Commission (SPARCO), Karachi and another v. Ahmad Mumtaz Mustehsan and another (2000 SCM R 890).
3. I have gone through the file of this case. I find that the resignation was submitted by the petitioner on to the learned Federal Counsel to seek instructions 1.2.2007 and was forwarded for favourable action. However, the petitioner was simply informed that the competent Authority has not accepted the resignation. I also find that no reasons whatsoever have been stated for refusing to accept the resignation. This writ petition came up on 30.3.2007 when its copy was handed over to the learned Federal Counsel to seek instructions in the matter. The case was admitted to hearing on 8.4.2008 and notice was issued to the respondents. Till date, no reasons have been stated as to why the resignation was not accepted. This being so, the said judgment in the case of Chairman, Pakistan Space and Uppers Atmosphere Research Commission (SPARCO), Karachi and another, becomes fully applicable. I deem it appropriate to reproduce the following observations of the Hon'ble Apex Court at page 892 of the said report:-- "It may be noted that tendering of resignation is a right of an employee to put an end to his service and the authority competent to accept the resignation is bound to process the same within the stipulated period of notice. It is well-settled that an employee cannot be compelled to serve an organization necessarily. However, his resignation can be refused to be accepted if any disciplinary action is pending against him or he is guilty for the charges of misconduct and to escape from the criminal liabilities he has tendered the resignation. In the general service laws no authority has been conferred upon an employer to refuse to accept the resignation on account of exigency of service of the employees. As in the instant case the petitioner without explaining the details of the exigencies have refused to accept the resignation of the Respondent No, 1, therefore, the argument being raised that services of the respondent were required to be utilized in a project involving national interest cannot be entertained in absence of any material. It is also to be noted that in such-like situation where the services of a skilled person are hired, there is no condition in the appointment letter that until the completion of a particular project the employee cannot resign from his service and if the employee accepts such condition then the employer can show hesitation in accepting the resignation whereas in the case in hand there was no service condition nor any authority has been given to the employer to refuse acceptance of resignation, which cannot be termed to be lawful and sustainable legally."
4. The writ petition accordingly is allowed. The impugned order refusing the acceptance of resignation tendered by the petitioner is declared to be without lawful authority and void. The respondents shall proceed to accept the resignation and pass orders accordingly within seven days from today failing which it shall be deemed that the resignation has been accepted. No orders as to costs.