Title: DR. MRS SUMAN V JIAN Vs MARWADI SAMMELAN THROUGH ITS SECRETARY AND OTHERS.
Citation: CIVIL APPEAL NO. 1480 OF 2012
Dated on: 20.2.2024
Corum: HON’BLE JUSTICE J.K. MAHESWARI & JUSTICE K.V VISWANATH
The current verdict from the Supreme Court of India concerns a civil appeal filed by Dr. Mrs. Suman V. Jain, the principal of a trust-run college. Dr. Jain had filed her resignation, effective on a future date, citing health grounds. She attempted to rescind her resignation before it became effective. The Trust denied Dr. Jain’s request to retract her resignation, forcing her to file an appeal with the Supreme Court heard by the two-judge bench by Justice JK Maheshwari and Justice KV Vishwanath.
Brief Facts of the case
In 1992, the appellant was appointed Principal of B.M. Ruia Girls and G.D. Birla Girls Colleges. Following a change in management in 1998, the appellant claimed interference and inappropriate statements from a new appointment. In 2003, the appellant, who was upset by the circumstances, wrote a complaint letter with coworkers but later removed it. Following charges of financial irregularities and indiscipline against her, the appellant resigned for health reasons, effective September 2003. The Trust President informed her of a thorough investigation by a Fact-Finding Committee and directed her to go on leave, with an officiating Principal. Three days later, the President sought his unequivocal resignation. The letter that said:
“If you want to resign unconditionally of your own volition with immediate effect and settle the controversy on this footing, the management can perhaps consider your request to drop the enquiry subject to affirmation of managing committee. Your resignation with effect from 24.09.2003 is not acceptable to the management. Six months’ notice can be waived on both sides in view of the present situation is not mandatory. If you are not willing to resign unconditionally with immediate effect, it is your choice. If you want to resign with immediate effect, the management may perhaps be persuaded to drop the proposed enquiry in larger interest of the institute. If no reply is received from you within 48 hours from receipt of this letter, the management shall take appropriate action in the matter as deemed fit.”
Further Dr. Mrs. Suman V. Jain, the appellant, requested that her resignation be accepted on a future date, citing medical reasons and adherence to government notice procedures. Despite her plea, management accepted her resignation with six months’ notice, effective the requested date. The appellant’s subsequent letter addressed false charges but did not acknowledge her resignation terms. The courts found no proof that the resignation was filed to evade an investigation, and the appellant’s requests for a future retirement were not agreed upon by management, resulting in a disagreement over acceptance terms.
Court analysis and judgement
The Hon’ble Supreme Court granted the appeal and overturned the decisions of the College Tribunal and the High Court, which had dismissed the appellant’s challenge to the rejection of her resignation. The court determined that the appellant’s resignation was a prospective or possible resignation that may be revoked at any moment before it became effective, unless there was a contrary regulation or contract. The court further determined that the trust’s acceptance of the resignation was unilateral and did not constitute an implied agreement or understanding with the appellant. The court distinguished Rev. Oswald’s case, which had been relied on by the lower courts, as not appropriate to the facts of this case. The Hon’ble justice JK Maheswari while delivering the judgement ordered the trust to regularize the appellant’s service period from the date of acceptance of resignation to the date of entering the new college as principal, and to count it as time spent on duty for all reasons, including pension. The court, however, denied the petitioner any back earnings or income for that period since she had not worked for the trust. The court further ordered the trust not to take any departmental action against the appellant in response to previous complaints.
“PRIME LEGAL is a full-service law firm that has won a National Award and has more than 20 years of experience in an array of sectors and practice areas. Prime legal fall into a category of best law firm, best lawyer, best family lawyer, best divorce lawyer, best divorce law firm, best criminal lawyer, best criminal law firm, best consumer lawyer, best civil lawyer.”
Written by- Namitha Ramesh
