|
Does
Service Continue If Resignation Is Withdrawn?
Is
an employee entitled to the benefits of continuous service if
he withdraws his resignation -- which had been accepted by his
employer -- during the notice period?
The
Supreme Court says "Yes" in a judgment delivered on October 7,
2005 in the matter of Srikantha S M V/s Bharat Earth Movers
Ltd ("BEML"), which overruled the judgment given in
the matter by the Single Judge and the Division Bench of the Karnataka
High Court. The judgment raises the question: Does the employer
have to ensure that all the dues of the employee are paid on the
very date the employer accepts the resignation, to disentitle
such employee from claiming continuous service benefits upon withdrawing
his resignation?
Brief
facts of this case are that one employee of BEML, Srikantha S
M, ("the employee") had submitted his resignation on January
4, 1993, which was accepted by BEML on the same date. However,
instead of relieving him from his employment on the same day,
BEML informed the employee that his casual leave till January
13, 1993 had been sanctioned and that he would be paid all his
dues on January 15, 1993. On January 8, 1993, the employee wrote
to BEML, raising several grievances and stating that if he did
not receive any suitable reply by January 14, 1993, his resignation
should be treated as withdrawn. BEML did not pay heed to this
letter of January 8, 1993 and paid the employee his dues on January
15, 1993 as it had informed him earlier, treating the employment
as terminated on that day.
On
the facts of the matter, the Supreme Court held that the employer-employee
relationship did not end on January 4, 1993 but continued till
January 15, 1993 when the employee was relieved and his dues were
paid. The apex court further held that an employee could withdraw
his resignation before the end of his notice period as per settled
law. The Supreme Court observed that it was "incumbent" on the
employer to give effect to the letter withdrawing the resignation.
BEML was directed to treat Srikantha S M as an employee till the
time of his superannuation in December 1994, and to give him all
service benefits, including arrears of salary till that date.
While
the judgment is based on the facts, it would have far-reaching
implications on the employer-employee relationship. The actual
judgment would need to be examined in detail before applying the
law laid down by it.
|
|
|
You
can direct your queries or comments to the authors
|
Source:
Times
of India, Mumbai Edition, October 24, 2005
|