The Supreme Court stated that an employee cannot be absent from work solely due to the pendency of their Voluntary Retirement Service (VRS) application.

The bench, consisting of Justice AS Oka and Justice AG Masih, was hearing the appeal filed by the State of U.P. against the Allahabad High Court's ruling, which ordered the reinstatement of respondent employees who had been terminated for absenteeism under the pretext of pending Voluntary Retirement Service (VRS) applications.

The respondent employees, who were employed as doctors in the State of Uttar Pradesh, submitted their Voluntary Retirement Service (VRS) applications in 2006 and 2008, and thereafter, they remained absent from their duties following the submission of these applications.

In 2010, the Appellant terminated the employment of the respondent employees, along with over 400 other doctors, due to their prolonged absenteeism. The termination was made under clause (b) of the second proviso to Article 311(2) of the Constitution, citing the impracticality of conducting a disciplinary inquiry.

The respondents filed writ petitions challenging their termination orders and seeking decisions on their VRS applications. The Allahabad High Court quashed the termination orders and directed their reinstatement along with consequential benefits.

Following this, the appellant preferred an appeal before the Supreme Court.

While allowing the State's appeal, the judgment authored by Justice Oka criticized the Appellant, the State of Uttar Pradesh, for unjustifiably keeping the VRS applications pending. However, it also noted that the respondents' absenteeism was unjustifiable.

“It is true that the conduct of the appellants in not deciding the applications for VRS cannot be supported at all. However, there was no reason for the respondents to take recourse to absenteeism. When the respondents found that their applications were not decided within a reasonable time, they could have adopted remedies in accordance with the law.”, the court said.

Given the respondent's prolonged absenteeism, the Court found the High Court's direction for their reinstatement as invalid.

Case Title: STATE OF U.P. & ORS. Versus SANDEEP AGARWAL