đ
What is the Difference between 'Voluntary Resignation' and 'Voluntary Retirement'? - YouTube
Channel: Suyash Verma | Legal Talks by Desikanoon
[0]
Hi everyone.
Welcome to Legal Talks by Desi Kanoon.
[3]
I am Suyash and today, I will talk about the
case of Union of India & Another v. Abhiram
[9]
Verma, Civil Appeal No. 1027 of 2020, wherein
the Honâble Supreme Court discussed the
[14]
difference between âvoluntary resignationâ
and âvoluntary retirementâ.
[20]
Before adverting any further, let us peruse
the dictionary meaning of these terms. Blackâs
[27]
Law Dictionary, Eighth Edition, defines âresignationâ
as âthe act or an instance of surrendering
[35]
or relinquishing an office, right or claimâ
and âa formal notification of relinquishing
[42]
an office or position.â Whereas âretirementâ
has been defined as âvoluntary termination
[50]
of oneâs own employment or career, especially
upon reaching a certain age.â
[56]
When I started reading this case, I was amazed
that there could be so many differences between
[62]
similar sounding terms such as resignation
and retirement. And after reading this case-law,
[68]
I find myself to be intellectually enriched.
Following are the important takeaways from
[74]
the judgment that I will discuss now: -
[78]
a. Resignation can be tendered at any time
but premature/voluntary retirement stems from
[85]
statutory provisions and it is confined to
that.
[90]
b. In case of resigning, no prior permission
or notice is mandated, but in case of voluntary
[97]
retirement, permission of the employer is
imperative.
[101]
c. Pension is not a matter of charity. It
is a creature of the statute and what has
[108]
been excluded in it cannot be included by
implication.
[112]
d. Pension Rules do not apply retrospectively
unless so expressly provided for.
[120]
e. Resignation has the effect of termination
whereas voluntary retirement has different
[127]
effects depending upon the concerned Rules
governing the subject-matter.
[131]
f. Pension has many purposes and objectives.
Such purposes and objectives must be taken
[139]
into account while looking into the question
that whether the termination of service is
[144]
in actuality a resignation or does it fall
within the four corners of retirement as defined
[151]
in the concerned laws.
[154]
g. If in fact an employee has resigned, then
later on, he cannot contend that what he meant
[161]
was voluntary retirement. One cannot be allowed
to breathe hot and cold at the same time.
[168]
Now, in order to understand the difference
between âvoluntary resignationâ and âvoluntary
[173]
retirementâ in a better manner, let us sift
through the pertinent observations by the
[178]
Supreme Court.
[180]
Firstly, the Court noted that âthere is
a distinction between âresignationâ and
[185]
âvoluntary retirementâ. A person can resign
at any time during his service, however, an
[191]
officer cannot ask for premature/voluntary
retirement unless he fulfils the eligibility
[198]
criteria.â
[199]
Secondly, the Court cited the case of Senior
Divisional Manager, LIC v. Shree Lal Meena,
[206]
(2019) 4 SCC 479, wherein it was explained
that: -
[208]
âIn service jurisprudence, the expressions
âsuperannuationâ, âvoluntary retirementâ,
[214]
âcompulsory retirementâ and âresignationâ
convey different connotations. Voluntary retirement
[221]
and resignation involve voluntary acts on
the part of the employee to leave service.
[227]
Though both involve voluntary acts, they operate
differently. One of the basic distinctions
[234]
is that in case of resignation it can be tendered
at any time, but in the case of voluntary
[240]
retirement, it can only be sought for after
rendering prescribed period of qualifying
[246]
service. Other fundamental distinction is
that in case of the former, normally retiral
[253]
benefits are denied but in case of the latter,
the same is not denied. In case of the former,
[261]
permission or notice is not mandated, while
in case of the latter, permission of the employer
[267]
concerned is a requisite condition. Though
resignation is a bilateral concept, and becomes
[273]
effective on acceptance by the competent authority,
yet the general rule can be displaced by express
[279]
provisions to the contraryâŠ.â
[281]
Thirdly, the Court also clarified that âresignation
has the effect of termination of an employee.
[288]
Voluntary retirement though has the effect
of termination of an employee, yet it has
[294]
different consequences. In the former case,
the ex-employee could not be entitled to pension,
[301]
whereas in case of voluntary retirement, the
latter one, the employee would be entitled
[308]
to pension depending upon the terms postulated
in the regulations or rules or the scheme.â
[314]
Fourthly, the Court also cited the case of
Sheelkumar Jain v. New India Assurance Co.
[321]
Ltd., (2011) 12 SCC 197, wherein it was laid
down that âthe court will have to construe
[326]
the statutory provisions in each case to find
out whether the termination of service of
[332]
an employee was a termination by way of resignation
or a termination by way of voluntary retirement
[340]
and while construing the statutory provisions,
the court will have to keep in mind the purposes
[346]
of the statutory provisions.â
[349]
Fifthly, the Court also opined that a man
ought not to have been deprived of pensionary
[355]
benefits âmerely because he styled his termination
of service as âresignationâ or because
[363]
there was no provision to retire voluntarily
at that time. The commendable objective of
[369]
the Pension Rules is to extend benefits to
a class of people to tide over the crisis
[375]
and vicissitudes of old age, and if there
are some inconsistencies between the statutory
[382]
provisions and the avowed objective of the
statute so as to discriminate between the
[387]
beneficiaries within the class, the end of
justice obligates us to palliate the differences
[393]
between the two and reconcile them as far
as possible.â
[399]
Sixthly, according to the Court, though Pension
Schemes are delegated beneficial legislations,
[406]
yet their beneficial construction or interpretation
âcannot run contrary to the express terms
[412]
of the provisions.â Such âissue cannot
be dealt with on a charity principle. When
[419]
the legislature, in its wisdom, brings forth
certain beneficial provisions in the form
[425]
of Pension Regulations from a particular date
and on particular terms and conditions, aspects
[432]
which are excluded cannot be included in it
by implication.â
[436]
Seventhly, the Court also observed that in
cases where an employee had resigned at a
[443]
point of time when the concerned Pension Rules
did not exist and later on, when such Pension
[450]
Rules got framed, the said employee cannot
claim Pension as a matter of right unless
[456]
the concerned Pension Rules expressly provide
for its retrospective applicability.
[463]
And lastly, the Court also said that once
âresignationâ has been tendered by an
[468]
employee, he must suffer the consequences
and later on, he cannot be permitted to take
[474]
âUâ turn by contending that what he really
wanted was âpremature retirementâ and
[481]
not âresignationâ.
[482]
Those were the observations by the Court.
I hope that the difference between âvoluntary
[488]
resignationâ and âvoluntary retirementâ
is clear by now.
[492]
Hence, I hope you enjoyed listening to the
show.
[495]
Thank you for listening.
Please do not forget to like and subscribe
[499]
us.
And if you have any comments, please feel
[502]
free to drop them in the comments section.
See you next time, till then stay tuned.
Most Recent Videos:
You can go back to the homepage right here: Homepage