Full Text
8th July, 2014 DELHI TRANSPORT CORPORATION ......Appellant
Through: Ms. Rashmi Priya, Advocate.
Through: Mr. Manish Malhotra, Advocate.
To be referred to the Reporter or not? VALMIKI J. MEHTA, J (ORAL)
JUDGMENT
1. This Second Appeal under Section 100 of Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (CPC) is filed against the concurrent judgments of the courts below; of the trial court dated 4.11.2000 and the first appellate court dated 29.8.2011; by which the suit of the respondent/plaintiff seeking voluntary retirement has been decreed.
2. Para 3 of the written statement filed by the appellant/defendant in the trial court admits that the appellant is governed by the CCS (Pension) Rules, 1972 for pension cases. Once CCS (Pension) Rules apply, Rule 48-A 2014:DHC:3141 RSA No.194/2011 of the CCS (Pension) Rules will come into application and which Rule 48-A with its sub-Rule 2 provides for automatic entitlement of VRS once the employee has completed 20 years of service and has given three months’ notice seeking voluntary retirement.
3. In the present case, it is not disputed by the appellant that the respondent/employee/plaintiff had completed 20 years of service and that he had given a three months’ notice seeking voluntary retirement. In view of proviso to Rule 48-A(2) if the notice for voluntary retirement is not accepted within a period of three months, then on the expiry of the period of three months, the notice is taken to be accepted and voluntary retirement takes place. In the present case therefore I do not find that the courts below have committed any illegality and/or perversity in decreeing the suit holding the respondent/plaintiff entitled to voluntary retirement.
4. No substantial question of law arises under Section 100 CPC for this appeal to be entertained, and the same is therefore dismissed, leaving the parties to bear their own costs. JULY 08, 2014 VALMIKI J. MEHTA, J. Ne