ups_00829 — It is a peculiar case to decide the date of Voluntary Retirement of the petitioner once rejected. Tribunal decided the date as it finds fit from 1-8-2006 from which date his absence was treated as LWP by the Railways

It is a peculiar case to decide the date of Voluntary Retirement of the petitioner once rejected. Tribunal decided the date as it finds fit from 1-8-2006 from which date his absence was treated as LWP by the Railways — This chunk is part of a case document titled "O.A. No. 900 of 2008" discussing a dispute over the date of voluntary retirement for an applicant who had applied for it in 2005 but was initially reject... — Facts: The Applicant, a Shunter, who joined Railways in 1966, applied for voluntary retirement with effect from 31-7-2005 after completing 35 years of service due to his family problems. That request was rejected by respondents by a cryptic order which was challenged in O.A. No. 1295 of 2005 and disposed of on 27-11-2006 directing the Respondents to reconsider their decision as that decision is arbitrary. Unsatisfied with that order, he filed a writ in High Court, WPCT 300/07 which was disposed of on 2-7-2007 directing the Respondents to decide his case as per rules. Thereafter on 13-11-2007, the Respondents replied him that earlier his request could not be granted due to shortage of running staff which is now improved to accept his resignation. Thereafter he filed O.A. No. 1064 of 2007 which was disposed of on 15-4-2008 directing the Respondents to consider the date from which his voluntary resignation is to be accepted, treatment of his absence and calculation of retirement benefits with effect from the date of retirement. In the meantime, the Applicant retired on normal terms on 29-8-2008. On 8-7-2008, an order was issued by authorities stating that the Applicant did not give his option for a fresh date from which voluntary retirement is to be effected as his request for voluntary retirement from 31-7-2005 was rejected. As the Applicant did not ask for leave or perform duty in the period from 1-8-2006 to 29-2-2008, hence he was treated as on LWP and the retirement benefit will be decided by the Personnel department, but the Applicant did not submit pension booklet to decide his retirement benefits. Hence the present case is filed for granting retirement benefits. The Respondents based on written argument repeated the episode as narrated above and his final pension could not be decided as he did not co-operate with the administration by submitting pension papers. The Tribunal recaptured the whole episode of the case as narrated above. The Tribunal on that basis observed that the Applicant is adamant to accept his voluntary retirement from 31-7-2005. As he had completed 35 years of service and / or attaining the age of 55 years has the option to get retired voluntarily by giving three months notice in the normal course and the Respondents are bound to accept that request for voluntary retirement. That request was rejected due to paucity of running staff. In that circumstance, it was held: