Allahabad High Court Quashes Police Officer's Resignation Over Non-Compliance with Statutory Notice Requirements

Court reinstates Ajeet Singh, citing invalid resignation acceptance due to lack of mandatory two-month notice and unmet debt discharge conditions  

In a significant ruling, the Allahabad High Court has quashed the resignation of Ajeet Singh, a Sub-Inspector in the Civil Police, due to non-compliance with statutory provisions under the Police Act, 1861, and U.P. Police Regulations. The court reinstated Singh, emphasizing the invalidity of his resignation acceptance due to the absence of the mandatory two-month notice and unmet debt discharge obligations.

Presided over by Justice Vikas Budhwar, the court meticulously examined the case where Ajeet Singh had initially sought resignation from the post of Sub-Inspector to rejoin his previous position as a Constable in Delhi Police, citing medical reasons. His resignation, dated December 28, 2017, was accepted by the Inspector General of Police, Meerut, on January 20, 2018. However, the acceptance was challenged as it did not adhere to the statutory requirement of a two-month notice period mandated by Section 9 of the Police Act, 1861, and Regulation 505 of the U.P. Police Regulations.

The court highlighted that Singh's resignation letter lacked any mention of the necessary notice period and was conditional upon his acceptance into Delhi Police, which is not permitted under the statutory framework. Additionally, the court noted that the acceptance was premature and overlooked the requirement for Singh to discharge any debts owed to the government or police fund, as stipulated in Regulation 505.

In its judgment, the court referenced past cases, including Satya Paul Kalra v. Deputy Inspector General of Police and Dinesh Kumar v. Commandant 15th Battalion, to reinforce the principle that a resignation notice must be unconditional and comply strictly with statutory requirements. The court underscored that acceptance of a defective resignation notice is invalid, thereby allowing Singh the right to withdraw his resignation before it was legally effective.

The court's decision has been hailed as a reaffirmation of legal protections for police personnel, ensuring that statutory requirements are not bypassed in administrative processes. The ruling mandates that Singh be reinstated with all consequential benefits within four months, underscoring the importance of procedural compliance in resignation and acceptance processes within the police force.

Bottom Line:

Police personnel cannot resign without following the mandatory two-month notice requirement as per Section 9 of the Police Act, 1861 and Regulation 505 of U.P. Police Regulations - Conditional resignation and acceptance thereof are invalid if statutory conditions are not complied with.

Statutory provision(s): Police Act, 1861 Section 9, U.P. Police Regulations Regulation 505

Ajeet Singh v. State of U.P., (Allahabad) : Law Finder Doc Id # 2807616