STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH & ORS. versus ACHAL SINGH

Citation: [2018] 9 S.C.R. 912 · Decided: 21-08-2018 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: ARUN MISHRA · Disposal: Appeal(s) allowed

Cited by 2 judgment(s) · cites 9 · see the full citation network in Lexace

Judgment (excerpt)

A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
912
SUPREME COURT REPORTS
[2018] 9 S.C.R.
STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH & ORS.
v.
ACHAL SINGH
(Civil Appeal No. 8421 of 2018)
AUGUST 21, 2018
[ARUN MISHRA AND S. ABDUL NAZEER, JJ.]
Public Health Administration: Respondents-doctors members
of Provincial Medical service filed applications for voluntary
retirement – Since no order was communicated to them, respondents
filed writ petition seeking voluntary retirement – High Court allowed
the writ petitions – Aggrieved State Government filed instant appeal –
Held: Under r.56 as applicable in the State of Uttar Pradesh, notice
of voluntary retirement does not come into effect automatically on
the expiry of the three months period – Under the said rule, the
appointing authority has to accept the notice for voluntary retirement
or it can be refused on permissible grounds – r.56(c) does not fall
in the category where there is an absolute right on the employee to
seek voluntary retirement – The respondents claimed right to retire
under Part III of the Constitution – Such right cannot be supreme
than right to life – It has to be interpreted along with the rights of
the State Government in Part IV of the Constitution – Where right of
public is involved in obtaining treatment, the State Government can
decline the prayer for voluntary retirement considering the public
interest – In case all the doctors are permitted to retire, in that
situation, there would be a chaos and no doctor would be left in the
Government hospitals, which would be against the concept of the
welfare state and injurious to public interest – It is obligatory upon
the State Government to make an endeavour under Art.47 to look
after the provisions for health and nutrition –  Therefore, the decision
of State Government in declining the prayer for voluntary retirement
considering the public interest did not suffer from any vice of
arbitrariness – When services are required, denial of voluntary
retirement is permissible under the Rules applicable in the State of
Uttar Pradesh – Health laws – Service Law – Voluntary retirement –
Uttar Pradesh Fundamental Rules – r.56(c) – Constitution of India
– Art.47.
912
[2018] 9 S.C.R. 912
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
913
Uttar Pradesh Fundamental Rules: r.56 and its Explanation –
Explanation attached to r.56  makes it clear that the decision of the
appointing authority under clause (c) of r.56  to retire a Government
servant shall be taken if it appears to be in public interest – The
explanation is applicable to both the exigencies viz., when
Government retires an employee or when an employee seeks
voluntary retirement, not only when Government desires to retire an
employee in public interest – The public interest is the prime
consideration on which authority has to decide such a prayer as
per the rules applicable in the State of Uttar Pradesh – Service
Law – Voluntary retirement.
Constitution of India: Principle of liberty and its curtailment –
Respondents-doctors members of Provincial Medical service seeking
voluntary retirement – The submission made upon principle of liberty
and its curtailment, the law must be just, fair and reasonable cannot
be accepted as the Fundamental Rules are statutory rules and have
been made by the Governor under s.241(2)(b) of the Government
of India Act, 1935 and provisions of Fundamental Rules cannot be
said to be unfair, unreasonable and oppressive – The concept of
liberty not to serve cannot be attracted when the public interest
demands as retirement can be subject to certain riders – The right
under Art. 19(1)(g) is also subject to the interest of the general
public and once service has been joined, the right can only be
exercised as per rules and not otherwise – Such conditions of service
made in public interest cannot be said to be illegal or arbitrary or
taking away the right of liberty – In case of voluntary retirement,
gratuity, pensions, and other dues etc. are payable to the employee
in accordance with rules and when there is a requirement of the
services of an employee, the appointing authority may exercise its
right not to accept the prayer for voluntary retirement – Service
Law – Voluntary retirement – Uttar Pradesh Fundamental Rules –
r.56(c).
Constitution of India: Art.14 – Equality – Plea of
discrimination – Respondents-doctors members of Provincial
Medical service denied voluntary retirement – Plea that the State
Government is discriminating between the doctors in the Provincial
Medical Services with the doctors working in the Stat

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