• search
For Quick Alerts
For Daily Alerts

Bench quashes notice to retd LIC development officer


Bench quashes notice to retd LIC officer
Madurai, Oct 3: The Madras High Court bench on Thursday quashed a show cause notice issued to a retired LIC development officer by the zonal office in Chennai, seeking explanation from him for not performing his duty while in service.

The officer, R Joseph Vimal Sudhakar, in his petition, contended he had been issued the notice after he took voluntary retirement on September 1. Justice S Nagamuthu said as per Rule 31(2) of the LIC Employees Pension Rules, 1995, voluntary retirement would become effective on expiry of 90 days after submission of application if no order of refusal was passed.

"The voluntary retirement, which had come into effect on the expiry of the 90-day period, cannot be nullified, because there is no such enabling provision under the said Rules," the judge said. Criticising conduct of the LIC and also the petitioner, he said the company should not have permitted the petitioner to work after September 1.

The Judge said he was inclined to allow the petition as disciplinary proceedings could not be continued after he had retired from service. The petitioner submitted a VRS application on May 31, 2012.

He contended he was deemed to retire from service voluntarily 90 days after submission of the application. The Zonal Manager initiated disciplinary proceedings against him on Aug 27, 2012, stating he had not sold any new premium. This was despite him having retired on Sep 1, 2012.

Bench: Voluntary retirement cannot be nullified

He claimed that despite his explanation on Sept 10, 2012 about his retirement, the ZM issued a show-cause notice on Oct 19, asking why his services could not be terminated. LIC officials admitted Joseph had submitted an application for VRS and no order was passed.

They alleged he continued to work for 90 days after submitting his application and drew his monthly salary and also applied for medical leave. Though no order rejecting his application was passed, it was considered rejected as disciplinary proceedings were initiated after he had submitted the application, LIC counsel said.


For Daily Alerts
Get Instant News Updates
Notification Settings X
Time Settings
Clear Notification X
Do you want to clear all the notifications from your inbox?
Settings X