Supreme Court: Employee resignation valid only after acceptance is communicated

It came as a reprieve for a railway employee after the Supreme Court reinstated him while terming his resignation that it would no longer be deemed to be accepted unless acceptance of resignation letter is officially communicated.

The Apex court observed that the worker had withdrawn his resignation earlier than acceptance, and best the inner verbal exchange of acceptance is no longer good enough unless it has been officially communicated to the worker.

On this case, the railway employee has served the Konkan Railway Corporation since 1990. But, after serving for 23 years, he resigned from the organisation on 05.12. 2013. Though his resignation was once accepted on 07.04, 2014, no official verbal exchange about acceptance was once served to the worker. On 26.05, 2014, the worker withdrew his resignation alternatively the Konkan Rail Corporation relieved him on 01.07. 2014.

The Konkan Rail Corporation had accepted the resignation on 07.04.2014 and asked him to report on duty to which he did on 19.05.2014. The officials also asked him about absence.

The lawyers on behalf of the worker argued in top court that the resignation letter didn’t attain eventuality, and his client can’t be relieved. The worker said that he had reported on duty when he was once asked by the employer and asked to clarify over his unauthorised absence.

The worker had approached the high court against the employer for relieving him, the court gave him relief but a division bench reversed it and gave a verdict in favour of Konkan Rail.

Later, he moved to the Supreme Court, the latter thought about his reasons as he had already claimed that he was once involved with the employer and there was once no official verbal exchange of acceptance of his resignation.