Vinod Kumar Gahan vs D/o Post on 23 October 2026

ORDER

Per : Hon’ble Shri Lok Ranjan, Member (A)

The present Original Application had been filed by the Applicant to seek the benefit of continuity of his previous service rendered under the Department of Post into his later service joined under the Railway – both being Central Government Departments – with pay protection and other consequential benefits.

2. Based on the pleadings of the parties on record, the relevant matrix of facts had emerged as follows briefly. The Applicant had joined as Postal Assistant (P.A.) under the Senior Superintendent of Post Offices (S.S.P.O.s), Jaipur City Division (i.e. Respondent No.3) on 05.07.2010. Purportedly, before joining as such, he had already applied for the post of Radiographer in the North Western Railway (N.W.R.) Headquarters, Jaipur. Later, during his service under Respondent No.3, the Applicant had participated in the written examination held on 12.02.2012 and eventually at the document verification scheduled on 17/18.01.2013 for the post of Radiographer in N.W.R.. He had been issued the no objection certificate (N.O.C.) dated 10.01.2013 – however, with the condition that before taking over regular appointment elsewhere he will tender unconditional resignation to the Department of Post, since he had not applied for the post of Radiographer in N.W.R. through proper channel. Eventually, the Applicant came to be selected for the post of Radiographer in N.W.R. and was issued the offer of appointment vide letter dated 21.04.2016 by the Divisional Railway Manager (Estt.), Jaipur. He had then submitted his application dated 01.09.2016 for unconditional resignation from Government Service under the Department of Post ; and the NATHU LAL KUMAWAT

NATHU LAL KUMAWAT

same came to be accepted by Respondent No.3 vide Memo dated 29.09.2016 with immediate effect. The said Memo dated 29.09.2016 had also mentioned that after acceptance of unconditional resignation of the Applicant, any claim whatsoever about taking him back again on duty, leave salary, refund of security deposit, etc. will not be entertained.

3. The Applicant joined in the Railway Department/N.W.R. on the post of Radiographer on 04.10.2016 in pursuance to the appointment/posting Order dated 03.09/10.2016. Thereafter on 10.05.2017, he had requested the previous employer, i.e. Respondent No.3 for sending – the Applicant’s service record, along with the record of leave (Earned Leave and Medical Leave) and also his last pay certificate – to the new employer, i.e. Respondent No.4 ; so that the benefits of his previous service can be added with his ongoing service. However, vide the impugned Letter dated 31.05.2017, the Respondent No.3 had rejected the aforesaid request of the Applicant by stating that in the order dated 29.09.2016 passed with reference to his application dated 01.09.2016, it was clearly mentioned that after acceptance of his unconditional resignation, any claim whatsoever about taking him back again on duty, leave salary, refund of security deposit etc. will not be entertained.

4. Aggrieved by the same, the Applicant had filed the present O.A. seeking the substantive reliefs inter alia – that the impugned Order/Letter dated 31.05.2017 be quashed and set aside with further direction to the Respondent No.(1 to 3) to send the service record including the leave account and the last pay drawn certificate of the Applicant in respect of service rendered by him with the Respondent No.3 from 05.07.2010 till the NATHU LAL KUMAWAT

NATHU LAL KUMAWAT

acceptance of resignation vide Order dated 29.09.2016, to the new employer i.e. Respondent No.4 ; and further that the Respondent No.4 be directed to add the previous service rendered by the Applicant with the Respondent No.3 in his service record maintained with Respondent No.4 for all purposes and grant the benefits of the previous service including continuity of service, pay protection and all other consequential benefits which are available to the Applicant as per law.

5. It was the case of the Applicant that he had worked as P.A. under Respondent No.3 in the Department of Post of the Central Government from 05.07.2010 to 30.09.2016 ; and thereafter he had joined as Radiographer under Respondent No.4 in N.W.R., which was another Central Government Department. As such, he was entitled for the benefit of continuity of his service, as well as pay protection as per the extant Rules/law of the Central Government services – and there was no question of estoppel against the statute.

Also, it was contended that he had submitted the application to Respondent No.3 for relieving him from the post of P.A. to enable him to join in the new employment as Radiographer in the Railway Department/N.W.R. ; but since the same was not accepted, he was compelled to submit an unconditional resignation from the post of PA. Nonetheless, such resignation cannot be a ground to deny the service benefit of previous service under the Central Government, which were otherwise available to the Applicant as per law.

Further, it was also contended that the Applicant had already applied for the post of Radiographer in the Railway NATHU LAL KUMAWAT

NATHU LAL KUMAWAT

Department/N.W.R. even prior to joining as P.A. under Respondent No.3 in the Department of Post ; therefore, there was no occasion for him to apply for the post of Radiographer through proper channel of the Department of Post since he was not working with the said Department at the stage of application for that other post. Hence, even the condition prescribed vide the N.O.C. dated 10.01.2013, regarding submission of unconditional resignation before taking regular appointment elsewhere since he had not applied through proper channel, was itself claimed to be bad and illegal.

6. Vide their reply, the Respondents (No.1 to3) had accepted only the matters of fact on record, inter alia – that the Applicant had joined as P.A. under the Respondent No.3 on 05.07.2010 ; that later during his service under Respondent No.3, the Applicant had sought an N.O.C. to appear for document verification in Railway Recruitment Board, Ajmer for the post of Radiographer in N.W.R. ; that he had been issued the N.O.C. dated 10.01.2013 however, with the condition that before taking over regular appointment elsewhere he will tender unconditional resignation to the Department of Post, since he had not applied for the post of Radiographer in N.W.R. through proper channe. It had also been accepted that eventually, the Applicant had submitted his application dated 01.09.2016 for unconditional resignation from Government Service under the Department of Post, which came to be accepted by Respondent No.3 with immediate effect vide Memo dated 29.09.2016 – while also mentioning that after acceptance of the Applicant’s unconditional resignation, any claim whatsoever about taking him back again on duty, leave salary, refund of security deposit, etc. will not be entertained. NATHU LAL KUMAWAT

NATHU LAL KUMAWAT

Further, it had also been agreed inter alia – that after leaving the Department of Post, the Applicant had on 10.05.2017 requested Respondent No.3 for sending the Applicant’s service record, along with the record of leave (Earned Leave and Medical Leave) and also his last pay certificate to the new employer i.e. Respondent No.4 ; and that the Respondent No.3 had rejected the said request of the Applicant by stating that in the order dated 29.09.2016 passed with reference to his application dated 01.09.2016, it was clearly mentioned that after acceptance of his unconditional resignation, any claim whatsoever about taking him back again on duty, leave salary, refund of security deposit etc. will not be entertained.

7. Per contra, the Respondents No.(1 to 3) had contested the other contentions of the Applicant. Vide their Reply, it had been stated that the Applicant had not informed the Respondent No.3 about his having appeared at written examination held on 12.02.2012 for the said post of Radiographer in N.W.R. Later he had submitted the application dated Nil which was received by Respondent No.3 on 20.12.2012 requesting for issuing of N.O.C. for him to appear in the interview on 17.01.2013 before the Railway Recruitment Board, Ajmer for the post of Radiographer as he had been declared successful in the related written examination. Since the Applicant had not taken permission to appear in the written examination for the post of Radiographer in N.W.R. after joining the service under Respondent No.2, the relevant N.O.C. was issued to him vide the Memo dated 10.01.2013, while imposing the condition that before taking over regular appointment elsewhere he will tender unconditional NATHU LAL KUMAWAT

NATHU LAL KUMAWAT

resignation to the Department of Post, since he had not applied for the post of Radiographer in N.W.R. through proper channel.

Further it was also contended that while the Applicant had claimed that he had submitted his resignation to the Respondent No.3 with the purpose of joining as Radiographer in N.W.R. under Respondent No.4, his resignation letter dated 01.09.2016 had actually mentioned inter alia – that he was not able to attend his duties as P.A. in Vidhyut Bhawan S.O. from 01.09.2016 due to his personal & family reasons ; that he had deposited one month salary of August-2016 on 01.09.2016 ; and that he was tendering unconditional resignation from his post, while also undertaking that he would not claim any benefit of this service in future. The said application dated 01.09.2016 of the Applicant for unconditional resignation from Government service had accordingly been accepted with immediate effect vide Memo dated 29.09.2016 of Respondent No.3.

Also, vide the reply of the Respondent No.4 on record, it had essentially been mentioned that as the Applicant had assailed the Order dated 31.05.2017 of the Respondent No.3., the contents of the present O.A. and claimed reliefs were mainly related to the Department of Post. Nonetheless, it had also been contended inter alia – that the Department of Post letter dated 01.07.2010 had mentioned that the Applicant’s posting was purely temporary and ad-hoc ; that the Applicant himself had not mentioned any dates while claiming that he had undertaken the selection process for the post of Radiographer in the N.W.R. before joining Department of Post ; that purportedly the benefit of pay protection can be granted for movements within Department by way of departmental examination and not when the Applicant NATHU LAL KUMAWAT

NATHU LAL KUMAWAT

had joined a new employer ; that the Applicant had categorically mentioned at the time of joining services as Radiographer in N.W.R. that he had resigned from the Department of Post ; and that the since the Applicant had categorically mentioned to his previous employer Department of Post that he would resign before joining the Railway Department, as such the Applicant was not entitled for benefit of counting of services rendered in the Department of Post.

8. Along with the Reply of the Respondents No.(1 to 3), the guidelines issued vide the O.M. dated 22.01.1993 by the Department of Personnel & Training, Government of India – as applicable to the cases of Government servants who had applied for posts in some other Department before joining Government service and on that account the applications could not be routed through proper channel – had also been submitted. It showed thereby that the benefit of the past service could be allowed in such cases, subject to fulfilment of the conditions that –

(i) the Government servant at the time of joining should intimate the details of such application immediately on their joining.

(ii) the Government servant at the time of resignation should specifically make a request, indicating the dates that he is resigning to take up another appointment under the Government/Government organization for which he applied before joining the Government service and that his resignation may be treated a ‘technical resignation’.

(iii) the authority accepting the resignation should satisfy itself that had the employee been in service on the date of application for the post mentioned by the employee, his application would have been forwarded through proper channel.

NATHU LAL KUMAWAT

NATHU LAL KUMAWAT

It had been argued by the learned Counsel for the said Respondents that the Applicant had neither claimed nor was it on record that at the time of joining as P.A. under the Department of Post, he had intimated the details of his application for the post of Radiographer under N.W.R. immediately on his joining. Further, with reference to the Applicant’s resignation letter dated 01.09.2016, the learned Counsel had argued that at the time of his resignation as P.A. under Department of Post, the Applicant had actually not made any specific request indicating that he was resigning to take up another appointment under the Government/Government organization for which he applied before joining the Government service and that his resignation may be treated a ‘technical resignation’. On the contrary, his resignation letter dated 01.09.2016 had mentioned of his inability to attend his duties as P.A. due to his personal & family reasons and that he was tendering unconditional resignation from his post, while also undertaking that he would not claim any benefit of this service in future. Hence, the Applicant’s claim for his resignation from the Department of Post to be treated as ‘technical resignation’ and to be allowed his past service benefits was an afterthought that was totally unsubstantiated and against facts available on record.

9. It had further been submitted that the same had in fact also been incorporated and reiterated vide the O.M. dated 26.12.2013 of the Department of Personnel & Training, Government of India, as extant on the material dates for the present case, as part of Consolidated Instructions on Technical Resignation and Lien, vide Para-15 thereof. Relevantly further, it had also been provided thereby inter alia that –

NATHU LAL KUMAWAT

NATHU LAL KUMAWAT

“13. A resignation from the service or post entails forfeiture of entire past qualifying service. The exception is technical resignation which does not result in forfeiture of past service.

14. In cases where a Government servant applied for post in the same or the other Departments through proper channel and on selection, is required to resign the previous posts for administrative reasons, the benefit of past service, if otherwise admissible under rules, is given treating the resignation as a ‘Technical Formality’. Resignation submitted for other reasons or if competent authority has not allowed him to forward his application through proper channel is a resignation and benefit of past service will not be admissible.” In the light of the above, it had been argued by the learned Counsel for the said Respondents that since the Applicant had not tendered a ‘technical resignation’, but had instead tendered an unconditional resignation for other reasons – clearly stated to be his inability to attend his duties as P.A. due to his personal & family reasons, while also undertaking that he would not claim any benefit of this service in future – the same would necessarily entail forfeiture of entire past qualifying service and benefits of past service will not be admissible.

10. We had carefully perused the pleadings of the parties on record, inter alia the relevant O.M.s dated 22.01.2013 and 26.12.2013 of the Department of Personnel & Training, Government of India. The arguments of the learned Counsels for the parties had also been heard.

11. Based on the perusal and examination as foregoing, the case of the Applicant was for treating his resignation from his previous service as P.A. in Department of Post as a technical formality with benefits of that service (in other words as a NATHU LAL KUMAWAT

NATHU LAL KUMAWAT

‘technical resignation’) towards his joining later as Radiographer under the N.W.R. – despite his not having informed the Department of Post about his appearing at the examination/selection process for the said post of Radiographer, purportedly as he had applied for that post before joining the Department of Post. It was also found that while the Applicant had claimed that reckoning the benefits of his past service with the Department of Post cannot be denied to him as that would tantamount to estoppel against Rules, but he had failed to show that he had fulfilled the prescribed requirements for being allowed such benefits.

At the outset, it was noted that even the date of his application had not been mentioned to show that the same was prior to his joining in the Department of Post, as such precluding his application through proper channel. Specifically further, it had emerged clearly that for being allowed the benefits claimed, the Applicant was required at the time of his joining as P.A. under the Department of Post, to intimate the details of his application for the post of Radiographer under N.W.R. immediately on his joining – which had not been shown to have been done by him. Moreover, at the time of his resignation, tendered eventually vide his letter dated 01.09.2016, the Applicant was required to make a specific request, indicating that he was resigning to take up another appointment under the Government/Government organization for which he applied before joining the Government service and that his resignation may be treated a ‘technical resignation’ – which also had not been shown to have been done by him. Per contra, his resignation letter dated 01.09.2016 had mentioned of his inability to attend his duties as P.A. due to his personal & family reasons ; and had also mentioned that he was NATHU LAL KUMAWAT

NATHU LAL KUMAWAT

tendering unconditional resignation from his post, while also undertaking that he would not claim any benefit of this service in future.

12. In the conspectus of all of the foregoing, we hold that the Applicant did not fulfill the prescribed requirements and hence was not entitled for counting of the benefits of his past service in the Department of Post after his joining as Radiographer under the N.W.R. ; and was liable for forfeiture of such past service. Hence, the impugned Order dated 31.05.2017 of the Respondent No.3 was also not required to be interfered with by us.

Further, the consequential reliefs claimed vide the present O.A. – for directions to the Respondent No.(1 to 3) to send the records in respect of service rendered by him with the Respondent No.3 to the new employer i.e. Respondent No.4 ; and for directions to the Respondent No.4 to add the previous service rendered by the Applicant with the Respondent No.3 for all purposes including continuity of service, pay protection and all other consequential benefits – were also found to be inadmissible to the Applicant.

13. Therefore, the present O.A. was found to fail on merits and was liable to be dismissed. We order accordingly.

14. Pending M.A.s, if any, shall also stand disposed of in accordance. No order as to costs.

(LOK RANJAN) (RANJANA SHAHI) ADMINISTRATIVE MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER

kumawat NATHU LAL KUMAWAT

NATHU LAL KUMAWAT