CCS Pension Rules | Withdrawal Of Premature Retirement Notice Permissible Before Effective Date: Himachal Pradesh High Court
Himachal Pradesh High Court ruled that under Rule 43(6) of the Central Civil Services (Pension) Rules, 1972, an employee may withdraw a notice of premature retirement before it becomes effective, subject to the specific approval of the competent authority and upon giving valid reasons.“Rule 43(6) of the CCS (Pension) Rules, 1972, specifies that a government servant who has opted for...
Himachal Pradesh High Court ruled that under Rule 43(6) of the Central Civil Services (Pension) Rules, 1972, an employee may withdraw a notice of premature retirement before it becomes effective, subject to the specific approval of the competent authority and upon giving valid reasons.
“Rule 43(6) of the CCS (Pension) Rules, 1972, specifies that a government servant who has opted for voluntary retirement and has given the necessary notice to the appointing authority cannot withdraw their notice without the specific approval of that authority”.
Justice Sandeep Sharma: “Though a plea has been taken by the respondents that the premature retirement of the petitioner is governed by the Himachal Pradesh Civil Services (Premature Retirement) Rules, 2022, which do not provide for withdrawal of a notice for retirement, but same also do not bar the appointing authority from reconsidering the matter on an application of employee for withdrawal of notice for premature retirement. Otherwise, this Court is of the view that rule 43(6) of CCS (Pension) Rules, 1972 is applicable here.”
Background Facts:
The petitioner, Indira Daroch, worked as Principal of Government Degree College, Kandaghat, District Solan. On 08.08.2024, she submitted a premature retirement notice due to health reasons, giving a three months' notice. Pursuant to which, her request was accepted by the department, fixing her retirement date as 05.11.2024.
However, prior to the effective date of retirement, the petitioner submitted a request on 14.10.2024 seeking withdrawal of her premature retirement notice, stating that her health had improved and she was now fit to continue in service but this request was rejected by the authorities.
Aggrieved by the same, the petitioner filed a writ petition before the High Court seeking quashing of the retirement notice and to be reinstated back to the post of Principal.
Contentions:
The petitioner contended that there was no valid reason to reject her withdrawal request since it was submitted before the effective date of retirement. She relied on Rule 43(6) of the CCS (Pension) Rules, 2021, which allows withdrawal of a premature retirement notice with the specific approval of the competent authority.
In response, the state submitted that once the request for premature retirement had been accepted, there was no provision under the Himachal Pradesh Civil Services (Premature Retirement) Rules, 2022 to allow withdrawal.
Findings:
The Court remarked that under Rule 43(6) of the CCS (Pension) Rules a government servant who gives notice for premature retirement may withdraw it only with the specific approval of the competent authority. While the rule restricts withdrawal, it does not prevent the authority from granting such a request if made before the retirement becomes effective.
The Court observed that the petitioner's withdrawal request was made on 14.10.2024, which was prior to the retirement date of 05.11.2024 and thus, there was no valid justification for rejecting it. It emphasized that the actual date of retirement, not the date of acceptance of the retirement notice, is the determining factor.
In Balram Gupta v. Union of India (1987), the Supreme Court held that “the appointing authority has no discretion to refuse withdrawal if the request is made before the notice period lapses and before retirement has actually taken effect”.
Further in Kranti Asso. Pvt. Ltd. & Anr v. Masood Ahmed Khan & Ors, the Supreme Court held that “while exercising discretionary power, authority must record its reasons. Reasons reassure that discretion has been exercised by the decision maker on relevant grounds and by disregarding extraneous considerations.”
The Court noted that the college authority failed to justify its decision with any rationale, even though the petitioner had provided reasonable grounds for seeking withdrawal as her health had improved.
Lastly, the Court clarified that although the Himachal Pradesh Civil Services (Premature Retirement) Rules, 2022 do not explicitly allow withdrawal of retirement notice, they also do not prohibit the appointing authority from reconsidering such requests. Therefore, Rule 43(6) of the CCS (Pension) Rules was held applicable in this context.
Thus, the Court allowed the writ petition and directed the college authorities to permit the petitioner to re-join the service.
Case Name: Indira Daroch v/s State of H.P. & Ors.
Case No.: CWP No. 3659 of 2025
Date of Decision: 15.05.2025
For the Petitioner: Mr. Arun Kaushal, Advocate.
For the Respondents: Mr. Anup Rattan, Advocate General with Mr. Rajan Kahol, Mr. Vishal Panwar and Mr. B.C.Verma, Additional Advocate Generals and Mr. Ravi Chauhan, Deputy Advocate General.