Judicial Decision on Voluntary Retirement and Termination of Employment for Doctors in Uttar Pradesh.
19 December 2024
Employee Related >> Corporate Law
In State of U.P. & Others v/s Sandeep Agarwal., the respondents, who were doctors employed by the State of Uttar Pradesh, submitted voluntary retirement applications (VRS) between 2006 and 2008. Despite this, their applications remained unresolved for an extended period. On 3rd May 2010, the State government terminated their employment under the second proviso to Article 311(2) of the Constitution, citing impracticality of conducting disciplinary inquiries due to absenteeism by several doctors. The respondents challenged the termination orders in the High Court, which ruled in their favor, directing reinstatement or consideration of their VRS applications.
The appellants argued that the delay in deciding the VRS applications was due to impracticality, but also criticized the respondents’ absenteeism. The court, while recognizing the delay by the appellants, concluded that reinstatement was not justified due to the respondents' conduct and the time elapsed. Instead, the Court decided that the respondents’ voluntary retirement applications should be accepted with effect from 3rd May 2010. However, it ruled that they would not receive any salary arrears or pension until the date of the judgment, though their pension would be refixed based on VRS from 3rd May 2010.