JUDGMENT 1. - By this writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution, the petitioner seeks to challenge the orders dated October 5, 1996 and November 21, 1998, respectively passed by Registrar Co-operative Societies Rajasthan and the Rajasthan State Co-operative Tribunal. 2. The petitioner while working as Supervisor with the Rajasthan State Co-operative Consumer Federation Ltd. Jaipur (for short 'CONFED') tendered resignation on March 13, 1984. Managing Director of CONFED forwarded the said resignation letter to the Establishment section after making endorsement 'May be accepted'. The Establishment Section thereafter in its office note made a report that the resignation of the petitioner appeared to have been tendered out of frustration as the allegations levelled by the petitioner against some corrupt officials were not enquired. The Establishment section sought approval of the President CONFED to make an enquiry about the allegations and not to accept it till the enquiry is completed. The President CONFED approved the office note. 3. In view of the initiation of the enquiry as aforesaid the petitioner vide letter date March 19, 1984 withdrew his resignation. But the General Manager CONFED informed the petitioner vide letter dated March 19, 1984 that since his resignation had been accepted by Ex-General Manager Sh. N.S. Chauhan on March 13, 1984, the question of its reconsideration did not arise. The General Manager also passed following order on March 19, 1984: "The resignation tendered by Sh. Vishnu Dutt Sharma, Salesman Medical Branch is accepted from the 13th April, 1984 i.e. after one month from the date of application subject to the no dues certificate and clearance about shortages." 4. Being aggrieved against the order of the General Manager, the petitioner preferred appeal before the President CONFED which was allowed vide order dated April 11, 1984 and the order of the General Manager dated March 19, 1984 was set aside. 5. Despite the order of the President CONFED the petitioner was not allowed to join the service. The petitioner thereafter instituted civil suit which was decreed but the Appellate Court set aside the decree in view of Section 75 of the Rajasthan Co-operative Societies Act, 1965 (for short 1965, Act'). Second Appeal preferred by the petitioner was dismissed as withdrawn on May 1, 1995. The petitioner thereafter instituted civil suit which was decreed but the Appellate Court set aside the decree in view of Section 75 of the Rajasthan Co-operative Societies Act, 1965 (for short 1965, Act'). Second Appeal preferred by the petitioner was dismissed as withdrawn on May 1, 1995. A dispute was then raised by the petitioner under Section 75 of the 1965 Act before the Registrar Co-operative Societies but it was rejected on November 29, 1995 on the ground that dispute did not fall under the provisions of Section 75 of 1965 Act. Rajasthan State Co-operative Tribunal (for short 'Tribunal') however allowed the appeal and remanded the case vide order dated June 12, 1996 to the Registrar for deciding the dispute treating it within the jurisdiction vide order dated October 5, 1996. The Registrar again rejected the petition holding that the resignation of the petitioner was validity accepted. The Tribunal vide its order dated November 21, 1998 also dismissed the appeal of the petitioner. 6. Respondents submitted return to the writ petition and supported the impugned findings of the Registrar and the Tribunal. 7. I have heard the rival submissions and perused the record. 8. Fact situation emerged from the record may be summarised thus:- (i) The petitioner made complaints against some corrupt officials of CONFED and when no action was taken the petitioner tendered resignation on March 13, 1984. (ii) Managing Director although made endorsement 'May be accepted' over the resignation letter yet forwarded it to the Establishment Section. Ultimately the President CONFED kept the resignation letter pending and initiated enquiry as required in the resignation letter. (iii) The petitioner on March 19, 1984 withdrew the resignation. (iv) On March 19, 1984 the General Manager CONFED passed the order accepting the resignation of the petitioner from April 13, 1984. The petitioner was informed vide letter dated March 19, 1984 by the General Manager that the resignation had already been accepted by Ex-General Manager Sh. N.S. Chauhan. (v) President CONFED although set aside the order dated March 19, 1984 of the General Manager yet the petitioner was not allowed to join the services. (vi) Civil suit was contested by the petitioner and ultimately got it withdrawn on May 1, 1995 in view of Section 75 of 1965 Act. In the civil suit Sh. N.S. Chauhan. (v) President CONFED although set aside the order dated March 19, 1984 of the General Manager yet the petitioner was not allowed to join the services. (vi) Civil suit was contested by the petitioner and ultimately got it withdrawn on May 1, 1995 in view of Section 75 of 1965 Act. In the civil suit Sh. N.S. Chauhan Ex-General Manager appeared as a witness and deposed that he did not accept the resignation of the petitioner. (vii) the application under Section 75 of 1965 Act, filed by the petitioner was rejected by the Registrar and the Tribunal holding that the resignation tendered by the petitioner was validly accepted. 9. It is well settled that an employee has a right to withdraw his resignation letter before its acceptance and in case the resignation is tendered with stipulation to be effective from a future date, he can withdraw it even after its acceptance but prior to the date on which the resignation was to be made effective. Their Lordships of the Supreme Court in Shambhu Murrari Sinha's case (2000) 5 SCC 621 , indicated that the resignation in spite of its acceptance, can be withdrawn before the effective date. 10. In the case on hand as already noticed, an endorsement 'May be accepted' was made over the resignation letter of the petitioner and it was forwarded to the Establishment Section. Ultimately the resignation letter was kept pending and inquiry was initiated in regard to the charges incorporated in the resignation letter. Thereafter the petitioner on March 19, 1984 had withdrawn the resignation letter. The General Manager's order dated March 19, 1984 accepting the resignation of the petitioner was set aside by the President CONFED on April 11, 1984. Observation of the General Manager in the letter dated March 19, 1984 that Ex. General Manager Sh. N.S. Chauhan accepted the resignation of the petitioner on March 13, 1984 was controverted by Sh. N.S. Chauhan himself in is statement on oath before the Civil Court. N.S. Chauhan categorically stated that he never accepted the resignation of the petitioner. It is thus established that the petitioner had withdrawn his resignation letter before its acceptance. Learned Registrar and Tribunal did not properly appreciate the factual as well as legal position and committed illegality in arriving at the impugned findings. 11. N.S. Chauhan categorically stated that he never accepted the resignation of the petitioner. It is thus established that the petitioner had withdrawn his resignation letter before its acceptance. Learned Registrar and Tribunal did not properly appreciate the factual as well as legal position and committed illegality in arriving at the impugned findings. 11. For the aforesaid reasons, the petition is allowed and the impugned orders dated October 5, 1996 and November 21, 1998 of the learned Registrar and Tribunal stand set aside. The petitioner shall be deemed to be in continuous service of CONFED, however he shall only be entitled to 50% of the back wages. The petitioner shall be allowed to join the duties and arrears of the wages shall be paid to him. The CONFED shall ensure compliance of this order within ninety days from today. There shall be no order as to costs.Petition Allowed. *******