Police Act | Officer Cannot Resign Without SP's Leave Or Two Months Notice: J&K High Court Dismisses Constable's Plea

A Division Bench of Justices Sanjeev Kumar and Vinod Chatterji Koul made the above observation while rejecting the writ petition filed by Bilal Ahmad Yatoo, a former Constable of the Jammu and Kashmir Police. Yatoo had challenged the judgment of the Central Administrative Tribunal, Srinagar Bench, which had earlier dismissed his plea against the rejection of his representation seeking reinstatement into service.

Yatoo, was appointed as a Constable in the J&K Police in 2016 and enrolled in the Basic Recruitment Training Course (BRTC) for the session 2016-2017. During training, he absented himself twice and was consequently punished with a censure.

Despite these lapses, the petitioner completed his training. However, instead of joining regular duties, he applied for 40 days of earned leave, out of which only 20 days were sanctioned. After working for merely two months, Yatoo submitted a voluntary resignation citing domestic issues in a supporting affidavit. His resignation was accepted on the same day by the Commandant.

Feeling aggrieved, Yatoo initially approached the Central Administrative Tribunal which disposed of his application with a direction to treat the OA as a representation. The representation was later rejected by the authorities. Yatoo then challenged this rejection in a fresh application which was dismissed by the Tribunal on merits. The present petition before the High Court arose from that dismissal.

Before the High Court, the petitioner argued that his resignation was not voluntary but made under coercion from militants of a banned organisation. The resignation could not have been accepted immediately, as Section 10 of the Police Act, 1983 mandated that a two-month notice was necessary before the resignation could take effect, he submitted.

The Court, however, found no merit in either contention.

On the first issue, the Court noted that the resignation was accompanied by an affidavit wherein the petitioner himself cited domestic problems as the reason. The theory of militant coercion, the Court observed, was a fabricated afterthought. The record was devoid of any contemporaneous communication or complaint to his superiors regarding any threat. Moreover, the Court pointed to the petitioner's unsatisfactory record having been censured during training and showing little interest in police service as indicative of his disinclination to serve.

“… The petitioner being enrolled as Constable in the J&K Police had the audacity to remain absent twice during his training.. It seems that the petitioner was never interested to serve as Constable in the J&K Police and, therefore, within two months of his being on active duty, he submitted his resignation on 11th July 2018, the court remarked.

On the second issue, the Bench closely examined Section 10 of the Police Act, 1983, and noted,

“No Police Officer shall be at liberty to withdraw himself from the duties of his office...without the leave of the Superintendent...or unless he shall have given to his superior officer notice in writing, for a period of not less than two months, of his intention to resign.”

The Court held that while Section 10 sets a general rule requiring two months' notice, it does not restrict the authority of the Superintendent to accept a resignation immediately if he deems fit. Since the Commandant had accepted the resignation on the same day it was submitted, with no objection recorded, the Court held that the requirement of notice period stood waived by such acceptance.

“.. there should be no dispute with regard to the fact that the petitioner, who had submitted his voluntary resignation on 11th July 2018, was permitted to resign by the Commandant by accepting his resignation on the same day…. therefore, there was no requirement of treating his resignation as his 'intention to resign' and wait for two months period to expire before its acceptance”, the court reasoned.

In view of these findings the court dismissed the petition terming it devoid of any merit.

Case Title: Bilal Ahmad Yatoo Vs UT Of J&K

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (JKL) 190

Click Here To Read/Download Judgment