The Punjab and Haryana High Court in an application filed against the order of the respondent rejecting the resignation of the petitioner held that the bank is not supposed to behave in the manner in which they have behaved with a married woman having a child of few months and merely joining at Rajkot had not changed the facts and figure and the petitioner is not entitled to a pension so no prejudice is going to cause to the respondent if resignation is accepted.

Brief Facts:

The petitioner, the general manager of the bank in Chandigarh was transferred to Gujarat while she was on sick leave and just had a child a few months back. She submitted her resignation after expressing her inability her duty to join, however the same was rejected after which the bank initiated a department enquiry against her for being absent from duty. The petitioner then filed the present petition seeking directions to the respondents to accept her resignation and setting aside the memorandum which initiated an inquiry against the petitioner.

Contentions of the Petitioner:

The learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner contended that as per the policy, the petitioner being a female employee was supposed to be placed where her husband is stationed or as near as possible to that place whereas the petitioner was transferred from Chandigarh to Rajkot and the petitioner left with no option requested the respondents to accept her resignation, however, respondent-bank acting in an arbitrary manner has refused to accept her resignation.

Contentions of the Respondent:

The learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent contended that the petitioner has not submitted a resignation letter at Rajkot, thus, her resignation could not be accepted and the head office has already rejected her resignation, thus, her resignation at this stage cannot be accepted and the petitioner remained absent, thus, the bank was forced to issue an impugned memorandum.

Observations of the Court:

The court stated that the petitioner was transferred ignoring the fact that she is a married woman, her husband is working in Chandigarh and she had delivered a child a few months prior to the date of transfer and the Policy specifically provides that a married woman shall be placed at the working place of the husband or nearby to that place and the respondents in violation of its Policy transferred the petitioner from Chandigarh to Rajkot and adding to the woes did not accept her resignation and the approach adopted by the bank seems to be harsh, pedantic and highly technical and the authorities have acted in a very mechanical and ruthless manner.

The court stated that the respondent-bank is not supposed to behave in the manner in which they have behaved with a married woman having a child of few months and the petitioner offered resignation because it was impossible for her to join at Rajkot and merely joining at Rajkot had not changed the facts and figure and the petitioner is not entitled to a pension so no prejudice is going to cause to the respondent if resignation is accepted without compelling petitioner to join at Rajkot and the impugned memorandum is the outcome of the baseless opinion of the respondents.

The decision of the Court:

The court allowed the petition and quashed the impugned memorandum and directed the bank to consider the application of the petitioner seeking resignation and pass a fresh order.

Case Title: Chandani vs Bank of India and ors.

Case No.: CWP-23783-2019

Coram: Hon’ble Mr. Justice Jagmohan Bansal

Advocate for the Applicant: Mr. Ramesh Kumar

Advocate for the Respondent: Mr. R.N. Lohan

Read Judgment @LatestLaws.com

Picture Source :

 
Kritika