The Punjab and Haryana High Court has observed that the position of a civil servant is not a position of privilege, rather a means to serve the public.

“It is well known that only a fortunate few have the opportunity to serve the state as an employee. Among those few, some have the privilege to serve the public….The government officers and civil servants, who hold the decision-making powers, are expected to address the grievances of the people, who face unfortunate and unjust circumstances. Without this intent, cases like the present one will continue to come before the courts. It is reasonable to expect that one day a better sense of duty would prevail and grievances of the public will be addressed at the outset,” the court said.

Justice Anil Kshetarpal made the observations in an order on a petition seeking quashing of an order dated 23.02.2023 passed by the Director, Public Instruction (Secondary Education), Punjab.

Background

The petitioner was directly recruited as Mathematics Master in 2021. Subsequently, after getting due permission from the competent authority, he applied for the post of the Assistant Professor (Colleges) pursuant to the government recruitment notice issued on 19.10.2021. He was selected for the said post. Thereafter, he was also issued an appointment letter on 03.12.2021, hence he submitted his resignation letter from the position of Mathematics Master.

Meanwhile, because an interim order was passed by the Court, issuance of the appointment order to the post of Assistant Professor was stayed. Hence, the petitioner requested for withdrawal of the resignation letter through a letter dated 10.12.2021. Since then, he ran from pillar to post for the withdrawal of his resignation letter. He thereafter filed a writ petition which was disposed of with a direction to the respondents to take a reasoned decision.

The Director, Public Instruction, while relying upon Rule 7.5(5) of Chapter 7 of the Punjab Civil Services Rules, Volume-I, Part-I, declined the request of the petitioner for withdrawal of his resignation letter.

The petitioner contended that the rule is not applicable to the petitioner’s case because it pertained to a scenario where a Government employee tenders his resignation from his position or service in order to accept an appointment in a private commercial company, corporation, or a government-owned or controlled company, or in a government-controlled or financed organization. He contended that he had applied for the recruitment pursuant to a recruitment notice issued by the Punjab Government.

The Bench, too, in its previous order had observed that the petitioner applied for the post pursuant to the recruitment notice issued by the government.

While observing that it was evident that the petitioner’s request for withdrawal of his resignation was kept pending for nearly one-and-a-half years, the bench had also directed the Director, Public Instruction (Secondary Education) to appear before the court and clarify his conduct.

When the matter came up for hearing on May 05, Tejdeep Singh Saini, Director, Secondary Education (Secondary), Punjab, and Navdeep Chhabra, Sr. DAG, Punjab presented a copy of an order recalling the impugned order dated 23.02.2023.

Case Title: Ankit vs. State of Punjab and others

Present:- Mr. H.C.Arora, Advocate and Ms. Sunaina, Advocate for the petitioner Mr. Navdeep Chhabra, Sr. DAG, Punjab

Click Here To Read/Download Order