Kochi, Feb 14 Resignation by an employee has to be accepted by the employer, subject to the conditions in the employment contract, and refusal to do so would amount to bonded labour, the Kerala High Court has said.
The observation came while the court was granting relief to a company secretary of a public sector undertaking (PSU) who was not being allowed to resign.
Justice N Nagaresh said that in the absence of any violation of the notice period or other conditions in the contract of employment, an employer cannot refuse to accept a resignation, except where disciplinary proceedings are contemplated for grave misconduct or for causing monetary loss to the establishment.
"In any other circumstance, if the employer refuses to accept the resignation of an employee, it would amount to bonded labour prohibited under Article 23 of the Constitution of India," the court said.
The order came on a plea filed by the company secretary challenging the show-cause notices and memos issued by the PSU directing him to resume duty after he had tendered his resignation.
The PSU had rejected his resignation and asked him to explain why disciplinary action should not be initiated against him.
It refused to accept his resignation because his services could not be dispensed with due to the financial position of the PSU.
Setting aside the PSU’s actions, the court said financial difficulties or an emergency could not be a reason to compel a company secretary to work against his will and without his consent.
"The disciplinary proceedings contemplated against the petitioner (company secretary) in the circumstances can only be seen as an attempt by the respondents (PSU) to violate the petitioner’s right to resign from service," the court said.
It also noted that the PSU had defaulted on payment of salary to the petitioner since October 2022.
The court observed that the petitioner resigned after his father died in 2020, leaving behind his mother, who had been suffering from neurological and psychiatric ailments for several years.
"The petitioner, therefore, had no other option but to search for another job," it said.
The court further noted that the petitioner could not secure alternative employment until the PSU sent a request to the Registrar of Companies to de-link his membership from the company.
The court directed the PSU to accept the petitioner’s resignation, relieve him from service "as expeditiously as possible and at any rate within a period of two months", and pay him arrears of salary, leave surrender benefits and terminal benefits to which he is legally entitled.
It added that the payments should be made as expeditiously as possible, subject to the financial position of the PSU.
