Orissa High Court’s Decision on Judge’s Resignation
The Orissa High Court recently made a significant ruling by reinstating a judicial officer who had resigned from her position due to the pressing medical needs of her autistic son. The court’s decision underscores the complexities that arise from real-life circumstances impacting professional commitments.
Background and Court’s Observations
The Division Bench, comprising Justice Manash Ranjan Pathak and Justice Sibo Sankar Mishra, observed that the resignation of the judicial officer was not effective. This was primarily because she withdrew her resignation before it was formally accepted by the Governor—the competent appointing authority. The court’s decision, dated September 10, highlighted that the resignation was submitted under duress, influenced by the inadequate medical facilities for her son at her place of posting.
Circumstances Leading to the Resignation
The judicial officer, serving as an Additional Civil Judge (Junior Division)-cum-Sub-Divisional Judicial Magistrate in Hindol, Dhenkanal district, faced significant challenges. Her son, diagnosed with autism, required extensive and continuous treatment, which was unavailable in Hindol and surrounding areas. Despite her request for a transfer to Bhubaneswar to facilitate her son’s treatment, her plea remained unaddressed.
Consequently, she tendered her resignation on November 29, 2022, citing the inability to secure necessary therapy for her son. The High Court’s Full Court moved to accept this resignation on December 20 and forwarded it to the State government for approval.
Withdrawal of Resignation
In a turn of events, the judicial officer withdrew her resignation on December 21, 2022, following a consultation with her son’s doctor who advised long-term treatment. Despite her withdrawal being submitted before the Governor’s acceptance, the State government proceeded with the resignation, issuing a notification on January 2, 2023.
More Read
Legal Findings and Court’s Ruling
The court found that the Full Court’s recommendation was not tantamount to a formal acceptance by the competent authority. According to service rules, a resignation takes effect only upon formal acceptance. Since the resignation was withdrawn before such acceptance, it was deemed invalid.
The court stated, “There was no valid letter of resignation before the competent authority to consider for acceptance, and therefore the letter of acceptance is null and void.” It emphasized that the resignation was not voluntary, given the circumstances under which it was presented.
Implications of the Judgment
The court quashed the State’s notification of January 2, 2023, and directed immediate reinstatement of the judicial officer as Additional Civil Judge (Junior Division)-cum-SDJM. Although she was not entitled to back wages, continuity of service and other benefits from January 3, 2023, were affirmed.
More Read
Legal Representation
Advocate Manoj Kumar Khuntia represented the petitioner judge. Additional Government Advocate Debaraj Mohanty appeared for the State of Odisha, while Senior Advocate Gautam Misra, along with advocate Sangram Jena, represented the Registrar General of the Orissa High Court.
