Research › Search › Judgment

Himachal Pradesh High Court · body

2025 DIGILAW 522 (HP)

Deepanshu Dhiman v. State of Himachal Pradesh

2025-03-27

SANDEEP SHARMA

body2025
JUDGMENT : Sandeep Sharma, J. Petitioner, who did her MD in Anesthesia from GMCH Chandigarh (Punjab University) as a direct candidate, came to be appointed as Assistant Professor through direct recruitment at Dr. Yashwant Singh Parmar Medical College Nahan, on the recommendation of Himachal Pradesh Public Service Commission in the month of July 2022. On 16.8.2022, petitioner joined against the aforesaid post in the college concerned. On 2.1.2024, applications came to be invited by PGIMER, Chandigarh, for two posts of Assistant Professor (Anesthesia) (SC). Petitioner being fully eligible applied against the post in question pursuant to provisional NOC granted in her favour by the respondent-State vide communication dated 10.4.2024 (Annexure P-1). Result of selection process was published on 5.3.2025, and petitioner was recommended to the post of Assistant Professor (Annexure P-2). 2. After receipt of aforesaid offer, petitioner intimated her willingness to accept the appointment vide communication dated 6.3.2025 and requested to grant time till 18.3.2025 for joining. On 7.3.2025, petitioner submitted her technical resignation to the appointing authority i.e. Secretary (Health) Government of Himachal Pradesh, (Annexure P-5) with the request to relieve her on or before 14.3.2025, however, fact remains that her request was rejected vide communication dated 17.3.2025 (Annexure P-6). On 19.3.2025, petitioner submitted unconditional resignation w.e.f. 19.3.2025, (Annexure P-7) with a request to intimate the dues payable by her to department so as to enable her to clear the same. Besides tendering unconditional resignation, petitioner also requested PGIMER, Chandigarh, to grant her extension of one month, which was accepted. Now since unconditional resignation of the petitioner is not being considered by the competent authority, petitioner is compelled to approach this court in the instant proceedings, praying therein for following reliefs: “(i) That the impugned rejection vide Annexure P-6 dated 17.03.2025 may kindly be quashed and set-aside. (ii) That the respondent may be directed to accept the “unconditional resignation” submitted by the petitioner vide Annexure P-7 dated 19.03.2025 forthwith, so as to enable her to join against the post of Assistant Professor in the Department of Anesthesia in PGIMER, Chandigarh well before 06.04.2025.” 3. (ii) That the respondent may be directed to accept the “unconditional resignation” submitted by the petitioner vide Annexure P-7 dated 19.03.2025 forthwith, so as to enable her to join against the post of Assistant Professor in the Department of Anesthesia in PGIMER, Chandigarh well before 06.04.2025.” 3. Having taken note of the aforesaid grouse of the petitioner, this Court passed detailed order on 25.3.2025, which reads as under: “Precisely, the grouse of the petitioner, as has been highlighted in the petition and further canvassed by learned counsel for the petitioner is that though petitioner has tendered unconditional resignation on 19.3.2025, but yet she is not being relieved on flimsy grounds. 2.Petitioner herein is working as Assistant Professor (Anesthesia) in Dr.YSPGMC, Nahan. On account of her having cleared examination at PGIMER, Chandigarh, petitioner received the appointment letter from PGIMER, Chandigarh, for the post of Assistant Professor (Anesthesia), as such, at the first instance, tendered technical resignation, which was not accepted as is evident from Annexure (Annexure P-6). Petitioner after receipt of aforesaid communication submitted her unconditional resignation (Annexure P-7), but same is not being accepted on the ground that there is paucity of doctors in the State of Himachal Pradesh. Since petitioner herein was to join as Assistant Professor at PGIMER, Chandigarh, on or before 18.3.2025, she applied for extension to PGIMER Chandigarh, which was granted vide communication dated 21.3.2025 and further extended upto 6.4.2025. 3.It is quite apparent from the pleadings adduced on record, which are duly supported by an affidavit that petitioner has not furnished any bond, thereby undertaking to serve the State of Himachal Pradesh, rather material available on record reveals that petitioner has done relevant course from other State. 4. While putting in appearance on behalf of the respondent, Mr. Vishal Panwar, learned Additional Advocate General referred to judgment dated 13.11.2024, passed by a Co-ordinate Bench of this Court in CWP No. 5593 of 2024, titled Dr. Ajay Kumar Chauhan v. State of Himachal Pradesh and Ors., to state that no mandamus can be issued compelling employer to accept the resignation, however Mr. Vishal Panwar, was unable to dispute that aforesaid judgment stands stayed vide order dated 17.12.2024, passed by the Division Bench of this Court in LPA No. 450 of 2024 (Annexure P-13). Ajay Kumar Chauhan v. State of Himachal Pradesh and Ors., to state that no mandamus can be issued compelling employer to accept the resignation, however Mr. Vishal Panwar, was unable to dispute that aforesaid judgment stands stayed vide order dated 17.12.2024, passed by the Division Bench of this Court in LPA No. 450 of 2024 (Annexure P-13). Simultaneously, in the aforesaid LPA, Division Bench of this Court vide order dated 17.12.2024 issued a positive direction to the respondent to accept the resignation of incumbent, who is otherwise unwilling to serve the State. 5. In the aforesaid background, learned Additional Advocate General to have instructions, that why and under what circumstances unconditional resignation tendered by the petitioner is not being accepted, especially when she has not furnished any bond/undertaking to serve the State of Himachal Pradesh. List on 27.3.2025.” 4. Pursuant to directions contained in the aforesaid order, Mr. Vishal Panwar, learned Additional Advocate General, has placed on record communication dated 26.3.2025, issued under the signature of Special Secretary (Health) to the Government of Himachal Pradesh, as well as copy of order dated 26.3.2025, whereby representation having been filed by the petitioner for acceptance of her unconditional resignation has been rejected. Aforesaid communication as well as copy of office order dated 26.3.2025 are taken on record. 5. Since respondents have already spelt out the reasons for not accepting the resignation of the petitioner in the communication dated 26.3.2025, coupled with the fact that very purpose and object of filing of the petition would be defeated in the event of any delay in disposal of the case at hand, this Court sees no reason to call for any reply from the respondent, which is otherwise represented by Mr. Rajan Kahol, learned Additional Advocate General. 6. It is admitted fact that petitioner while joining as Assistant Professor at Dr. Yashwant Singh Parmar Medical College Nahan, pursuant to recommendation made by Himachal Pradesh Public Service Commission never furnished any bond thereby undertaking, thereby agreeing to serve the State of Himachal Pradesh for any specific period. If it is so, unconditional resignation tendered by her from the post in question could not have been rejected especially for the reasons assigned in order dated 26.3.2025. 7. If it is so, unconditional resignation tendered by her from the post in question could not have been rejected especially for the reasons assigned in order dated 26.3.2025. 7. It would be apt to take note of order dated 26.3.2025, passed by the Secretary (Health) to the Government of Himachal Pradesh rejecting the unconditional resignation of the petitioner tendered by the petitioner, which reads as under: “WHEREAS, Dr. Deepanshu Dhiman, Assistant Professor, Department of Anesthesia, Dr. YSPGMC Nahan had filed writ petition before the Hon'ble High Court praying therein that the respondent may be directed to accept her unconditional resignation submitted to undersigned on 19.03.2025 forthwith, so as to enable her to join against the post of Assistant Professor in the Department of Anesthesia in PGIMER, Chandigarh well before 06.04.2025. AND WHEREAS, the notice of resignation dated 19.03.2025 as stated by petitioner has not received in the office of undersigned till today, however, the copy of same has been procured/found in the writ petition annexed as Annexure P-7 and the same has been examined in detailed and depth keeping in view the availability of faculties in the overall specialties as well as requirement's of NMC norms in the concerned institution. AND WHEREAS from the perusal of record/strength of faculties/specialties in the concerned institution i.e. Dr. YSPGMC Nahan as well as availability of strength required to fulfill the NMC norms, it is clear that the said institution is already facing overall acute shortage of faculties, for which the NMC has also imposed monetary penalties to all medical colleges of the state including this institution. Thus the State Government is not in a position to allow further reduction of faculty. NOW THEREFORE in view of the position outlined above the undersigned is in the view that the "unconditional resignation" of Dr. Deepanshu Dhiman from the post of Assistant Professor in the department of Anesthesia at Dr. YSPGMC Nahan cannot be acceded to in the interest of institution and public at large. The representation stands decided accordingly.” 8. Careful perusal of aforesaid order suggests that resignation of the petitioner has not been accepted on the ground that there is paucity of doctors and in the event of acceptance of resignation tendered by the petitioner, there shall be shortfall in faculty, which may attract monetary penalties to the college concerned on account of its having not fulfilled guidelines/parameters laid down by the NMC. 9. 9. Resignation of an employee cannot be rejected on the ground set up by the respondent-State. Every individual has a right to progress in his/her career. Since petitioner stands selected against the post of Assistant Professor in a premier institution i.e. PGIMER, she has every right to tender her resignation from her previous institution, enabling her to join new institution. To meet the shortfall, if any, of the faculty, respondent-State has many options. Post offered to be vacated by the petitioner can be filled up by way of direct recruitment, contract or even by promotion in terms of Recruitment & Promotion Rules. 10. In similar facts and circumstances, Division Bench of this Court in LPA No. 450 of 2024 titled Ajay Kumar Chauhan v. State of Himachal Pradesh, rejected the plea of shortage of staff and directed the respondents to accept the resignation forthwith. It would be apt to take note of following paras : “8. On 17.12.2024, Co-ordinate Division Bench had observed as under:- “The resignation tendered by the appellant has been rejected by the State Government on the ground that there is an acute shortage of Medical Officers (Specialists) in the State. However, we find that the same by itself cannot be a reason enough which can bind an unwilling employee to serve the State. Therefore, the respondent-State to explain its stand on the next date of hearing.” 9. Thereafter, the applicant/appellant has filed this application on 26.12.2024 with the submission that his resignation be accepted as a unconditional resignation, as he is unwilling to serve with the present employer as he has been offered appointment in AIIMS Bilaspur and he wants to excel his career in future. 10. In view of this application, learned Additional Advocate General was directed to have instructions in this regard. 11. Today, learned Additional Advocate General has expressed his inability to have instructions because of closure of offices on account of death of Ex-Prime Minister Dr. Manmohan Singh. 12. Learned Counsel for appellant has submitted that yesterday offices were open and delay in adjudication of matter would hamper his future causing irreparable loss to him as AIIMS Authority may withdraw the offer of appointment. 13. Manmohan Singh. 12. Learned Counsel for appellant has submitted that yesterday offices were open and delay in adjudication of matter would hamper his future causing irreparable loss to him as AIIMS Authority may withdraw the offer of appointment. 13. In the aforesaid facts and circumstances, this application is taken for consideration and considering the averments made in application and the submissions made on behalf of parties, the applicant/appellant is permitted and directed to submit his unconditional resignation to the Principal Secretary (Health) to the Government of Himachal Pradesh, on or before 30.12.2024 and in such eventuality, such resignation shall be accepted by the concerned Authority on the very same day, subject to final outcome of present appeal and thereafter, applicant/appellant shall be at liberty to join in AIIMS Bilaspur or wherever he intends to join.” 11. In the aforesaid Order, Hon’ble Division Bench has categorically held that in case an employee is not willing to serve the department, he cannot be forced to do so. 12. Yet in another case, Hon’ble Division Bench of this Court vide order dated 9.1.2025, in LPA No. 25 of 2025, titled Dr. Trilok Chand v. Union of India and Anr ., has deprecated the action of the respondents in denying NOC to the petitioner therein, who wanted to apply for post of Assistant Professor ENT in AIIMS Bilaspur. In the aforesaid case, Division Bench of this Court categorically ruled that shortfall of vacancy cannot be a valid ground for the State to deny NOC. 13. Leaving everything aside, once there is nothing to suggest that while joining at Dr. Yashwant Singh Parmar Medical College Nahan, petitioner had not furnished any kind of bond or undertaking to serve the State for any specific period, respondent has otherwise no right to reject the resignation tendered by the petitioner, who now for advancement of her career wants to join a premier institution. 14. Consequently, in view of the above, this court finds merit in the present petition and accordingly, same is allowed. Order dated 17.3.2025 passed by the Secretary (Heath) to the Government of Himachal Pradesh (Annexure P-6) and communication dated 26.3.2025, thereby rejecting the unconditional resignation of the petitioner are quashed and set-aside. Resignation tendered by the petitioner (Annexure P-5) shall be deemed to have been accepted. Respondent is directed to relieve the petitioner immediately. Order dated 17.3.2025 passed by the Secretary (Heath) to the Government of Himachal Pradesh (Annexure P-6) and communication dated 26.3.2025, thereby rejecting the unconditional resignation of the petitioner are quashed and set-aside. Resignation tendered by the petitioner (Annexure P-5) shall be deemed to have been accepted. Respondent is directed to relieve the petitioner immediately. Petitioner shall be entitled to all service benefits arising out of her service with the respondent in accordance with law. In the aforesaid terms, present petition is disposed of alongwith pending applications, if any. 15. Registry to list the case at hand for compliance of 1.4.2025.