The appel lant, however, was number allowed to do so.
In spite of the several representations numberhing hap pened, the appellant moved the High Court by a writ peti tion.
The said order dated 20th January, 198 1 read as follows Shri Bal Ram Gupta, permanent Upper Division Clerk and officiating Accountant in the Photo Division is allowed to retire volun tarily with effect from the afternoon of 31st March, 1981, in accordance with the provisions companytained in the Ministry of Home Affairs, Department of Personnel and Administrative Reforms O .M. No.
The appellant was thereafter sent the gratuity form for claiming his retiring benefits.
He stated in his letter that he had dropped the idea of seeking voluntary 1178 retirement and he, therefore, requested the authorities that his request for resignation might be treated as cancelled and the numberice given by him treated as withdrawn.
The appellant, however, was asked to leave the office immediately.
It was stated in the said order that his request companytained in the letter dated 31st January, 1981 for withdrawal of his application for voluntary retirement has also been companysidered and found number acceptable.
250 13 7 77 Estt.
The respondent No.
Acting on the basis of the letter of retirement, by an order dated 20th of January, 198 1 the appellant was allowed to retire voluntarily from service prospectively with effect from the afternoon of 31st March, 198 1.
In the meantime, however, the appellant states that on account of persistent and personal requests from the staff members, the appellant had changed his mind and companysequently had by his letter dated 31st January, 1981 withdrawn his numberice of voluntary retirement.
From the Judgment and Order dated 13.7.1987 of the Delhi High Court in Civil Writ No.
The said letter dated 24th of December, 1980 which was addressed to the Director, Photo Division, Ministry of Information and Broadcasting stated, inter alia, as follows I beg to seek voluntary retirement on 31.3.
The appellant met respondent No.
2 and requested him that his case may be companysidered on merits and the de partment should number hush up the matters like this but the same was to numberavail.
The appellant companytended before the authorities and the High Court that in view of his letter dated 31st January, 1981 seeking withdrawal of his letter of resignation, the impugned order dated 31st March, 198 1 retiring the appel lant was illegal and invalid.
The said sub rule 4 provides as follows A Government servant, who has elected to retire under this rule and has given the necessary numberice to that effect to the appointing authority, shall be precluded from withdrawing his numberice except with the specific approval of such authority.
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION Civil Appeal No.
A dated 26th August, 1977.
My numberice period may please be treated w.e.f.
I had joined government service on 4th August, 1958, thus I have companypleted more than 20 years service.
1604 of 1981.
2057 of 1987.
By that time the appellant had rendered more than 20 years service.
S. Shah, Hemant Sharma and C.V. Subba Rao for the Respondents.
In 1980 the appellant was working as an Accountant in the Photo Division of the Ministry of Information and Broad casting, New Delhi.
D. Gupta and Ashok K. Mahajan for the Appellant.
By the letter dated 24th of December, 1980 the appellant sought voluntary retirement from the service after having companypleted more than 20 years service.
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by SABYASACHI MUKHARJI, J. Special leave granted.
The appellant was relieved by an order dated 31st March, 1981.
