UP Police Officer Can't Resign Without Mandatory 2-Month Notice Under Statutory Regulations: Allahabad High Court

The Allahabad High Court has held that where a Police Officer seeks resignation, they must provide the department with the mandatory two-month notice period mandated by Regulation 505 of the U.P. Police Regulations read with the Police Act, 1961. Justice Vikas Budhwar held that non-compliance with the aforementioned provisions would render the resignation defective.The petitioner was appointed as a Constable in Delhi Police in 2010 and later as Sub-Inspector in U.P. Police in 2017. Subsequently, he sought relieving on medical grounds to rejoin Delhi Police. His resignation was accepted and recovery of training costs was initiated against him. Thereafter, he sought to withdraw his resignation, contending that in the absence of the mandatory notice period, his application would be defective, rendering the resignation invalid. However, this request was rejected and the rejection order was challenged before the High Court. The Court held that on a joint reading of Section 9 of the Police Act and Section 505 of the U.P. Police Regulations, no officer may withdraw himself from his office without explicit authorization by the District Superintendent, unless he has given to a superior office his intention to resign in writing. It was further held that the provisions cast a duty on the concerned officer to provide a notice of two months conveying his intention to resign. “Once the notice was defective and not in conformity with the provisions contained under Section 9 of the Police Act read with Regulation 505 of the Police Regulations, then it could not have been taken notice of,” held Justice Vikas Budhwar.The Court also relied on the judgement of the Allahabad High Court in Dinesh Kumar v. Commandant 15th Battalion to hold that the purpose of the two-month notice period was twofold: (i) was to give the employer time to make alternative arrangements; and (ii) to award an opportunity to the employee to reconsider their resignation. Further, the Court observed,“the first proviso to Regulation 505 of the Police Regulations also throws light that the resignation can only be accepted by the authority w.e.f. a date subsequent to the date of expiry of the notice and not prior to it, meaning thereby that two months notice is to be given by the police personnel seeking resignation. Moreover, Regulation 505 of the Police Regulation, also adds to one another aspect that his resignation cannot be accepted until and unless he fully discharged the debt.”Justice Budhwar held that in the present case the resignation of the petitioner was also conditional. By the letter dated 28.12.2018, the petitioner sought resignation and repatriation to the Delhi Police Force. It was held that such a resignation did not fall within the confines of Section 9 of the Police Act or the concerned Regulations. Further, the Court held that a resignation could only be accepted by the authority on a date subsequent to the date of expiry of the notice period and not prior to it, nor can it be done till the concerned officer fully discharged their debt. Finding that the above had not been satisfied in the present case, the writ petition was allowed and the petitioner was reinstated to his position as Sub-Inspector. Case Title: Ajeet Singh v. State of U.P. and 5 Ors. [WRIT - A No. - 14825 of 2018]Click Here To Read/Download Order

UP Police Officer Can't Resign Without Mandatory 2-Month Notice Under Statutory Regulations: Allahabad High Court

Upasna Agrawal

Tags