RAJ KUMAR SINGH versus UNION OF INDIA & ORS.

Citation: [2009] 1 S.C.R. 659 · Decided: 27-01-2009 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: ARIJIT PASAYAT · Disposal: Dismissed

Judgment (excerpt)

[2009] 1 S.C.R. 659 
--.;._ 
RAJ KUMAR SINGH 
A 
v. 
UNION OF INDIA & ORS. 
(Civil Appeal No. 443 of 2009) 
JANUARY 27, 2009. 
B 
[DR. ARIJIT PASAYAT AND ASOK KUMAR 
... 
GANGUL Y, JJ.) 
Service Law: Removal from service - Writ petition - Plea c 
of Employer-State that it was not removal but acceptance of 
resignation - Employee denying having resigned and 
alleging that his signature were taken on blank paper -
Dismissal of petition and Writ appeal by High Court - On 
appeal, Held: High Court rightly dismissed writ petition -
D 
,... 
Allegation of taking signature on blank paper since involved 
disputed question of fact, could not have gone into in a writ 
petition. 
Appellant filed a writ petition alleging his removal 
from service. Plea of respondent-State was that he was 
E 
not removed but the same was acceptance of his 
resignation. Appellant denied to have resigned, and 
alleged that his signatures were taken on blank papers 
;.. 
while he was in illegal detention. Single Judge of High 
Court dismissed the petition holding that the authorities 
F 
had acted on the basis of resignation. Writ appeal was 
also dismissed. Hence the present appeal. 
Dismissing the appeal, the Court 
HELD: The plea of the appellant that he has not given 
G 
voluntary resignation and the blank signatures were 
~ taken from him, is unsustainable. There is no material on 
record and, in fact, it is not the stand of the appellant that 
he made any grievance about the aforesaid act before 
any authority. Whether he had signed the letter voluntarily 
H 
659 
660 
SUPREME COURT REPORTS 
[2009) 1 S.C.R. 
A or signatures were taken on blank papers involves 
disputed questions of fact which cannot be decided in a 
writ petition. Single Judge and the Division Bench of High 
Court noted that the authorities have acted on the basis 
of the letter of resignation. That being so, there is no 
B scope for interference in this appeal. [Para 5] (661-D-F] 
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION: Civil Appeal No. 443 
of 2009. 
From the Judgment and final Order dated 23.02.2007 of 
c the Gauhati High Court in Writ Appeal No. 261 of 2003. 
S.C. Paul, Resham Singh, Roopa Paul and Reema 
Chopra Satyendra Kumar for the Appellant. 
A. Sharan, A.S.G. Amit Anand Tiwari, Subash Kaushik, 
D S.N. Terdol and Sushma Suri for the Respondent. 
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by 
DR. ARIJIT PASAYAT, J.1. Leave granted. 
2. Challenge in this appeal is to the judgment passed by 
E a Division Bench of the Guwahati High Court dismissing the 
writ appeal filed by the appellant. Appeal was directed against 
the judgment and order dated 19.5.2003 passed by the 
learned Single Judge in Civil Rule No.3053of1996. Appellant's 
case in the writ petition and the writ appeal was that while 
F serving as Rifleman in the Assam Rifles he was removed from 
service on the ground of desertion and that too without serving 
any notice to him as required under law and without holding any 
disciplinary proceedings. The respondent-Union of India took 
the stand that the writ petitioner and others got themselves 
G involved in some controversies whereupon the writ petitioner 
was given punishment of quarters guard. Thereafter he 
submitted a letter of resignation which was accepted by order 
dated 18.12.1995 to be effective .from 29.2.1996. But before 
that date the writ petitioner deserted whereupon he was 
declared as deserter and notices were served on him along 
H with others. Learned Single Judge held that the appellant was 
RAJ KUMAR SINGH v. UNION OF INDIA & ORS. 
661 
[DR ARIJIT PASAYAT, J.] 
not removed from service on the ground of desertion but on 
A 
the ground that he had sought for voluntary discharge from 
service which was accepted. 
3. Learned counsel for the appellant submitted that there 
was, in fact, no voluntary resignation and his signatures were 
taken on blank papers while he was in illegal detention. 
B 
4. Learned additional standing counsel referred to the 
letter dated 21.11.1995 wherein the appellants clearly stated 
that he wanted the resignation from service due to domestic 
problem as there was nobody in the family to look after it. Three 
persons including the appellant had submitted for discharge 
C 
from service at own request and the same request was 
accepted on 23.11.1995 and the same was to be effective from 
29.2.1996. 
5. We find that the authorities placed on record original 
letter dated 23.11.1995. By order dated 18.12.1995, the DG, 
D 
Assam Rifles 

Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.