One Cannot Withdraw Resignation Once It Has Been Accepted As Stated By The Apex Court

NAME OF THE CASE AND CORAM

• Case Name:M/s New Victoria Mills & Ors. V. Shrikant Arya
• Coram: Justice SK Kaul and Justice MM Sundresh
• Citation: LL 2021 SC 506

KEY TAKEAWAYS

• A supervisor, named Arya Shrikant wanted to avail the services under MVRS but he had to submit his resignation.
• But he still had some issues with the NTC relating to the deposits. So he later made an application so that his request for the suspension would be acknowledged till the provident fund was deposited in his account.
• The court also ruled that he must get the benefits of the plan paid to him, without prejudice to his rights and claims in the proceedings.

CASE BACKGROUNDS

• The supervisor of National Textile Corporation Limited since 1991, Shrikant Arya, was shifted to another industry set up in Kanpur.
• Arya, wanted to avail the opportunity under Modified Voluntary Retirement Scheme which needed the resignation to come through with the request of disbursing the payment to avail the services promptly.
• Since he had an existing problem with the NTC referring to the deposits, he later made a request so that his request for the suspension would be acknowledged till the provident fund was deposited in his account.
• On 1st June, 2003 his name appeared under the accepted letters for resignation under the MVRS and on 2nd June, 2003 a letter was issued by the NTC where he was ordered to attend his duties as the earlier dates for cutoff were cancelled due to a new date coming into effect.

CASE RELEVENCE

• An aggrieved Arya approached The High Court of Allahabad with a writ to quash the order which was to seek authorities for allowing him to join the duties as the Supervisor and for the payment of all the remaining expenditures.
• Ruling in Arya’s favor, the single judge ruled that it was “not clear” that Arya made an unconditional offer to resign at some point.
• It was further observed that Arya’s resignation was conditional on the payment of all contributions, which included the funds which first had to be liquidated and paid to him.
• The Court further ruled that he benefited from the benefits of the scheme which had been paid to him, without prejudice to his rights and claims in the proceedings.

Hope you enjoyed reading this. You may now be able to answer the following questions, let us know in the comments section

1. What do you understand by Modified Voluntary Retirement Scheme?
2. Do you think Apex Court was correct in ruling this statement?