Judgment Intelligence
Petition DismissedNeeraj Bishnoi v. Comptroller and Auditor General of India & Ors.
2026:RJ-JP:35273-DB
D.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 8941/2026
- Court
- Rajasthan High Court
- Date of Decision
- 1 September 2026
- Bench
- Justice Inderjeet Singh and Justice Sandeep Taneja
- Relevant Acts & Sections
- Central Civil Services (Pension) Rules, 2021 — Rule 26(5); Central Civil Services (Conduct) Rules, 1964 — Rules 3(1)(vii), 5(1), 5(4)
Final Outcome
Writ petition dismissed; the Tribunal's order of 27.02.2026 was left undisturbed and pending applications were disposed of (paras 9-10).
Source Rajasthan High Court, decided 01.09.2026
Key holdings
- Withdrawal of a resignation under Rule 26(5) needs both a compelling reason for resigning and a material change in those circumstances (para 6).
- Resigning to contest an election is a voluntary act, and the later loss of pension is not a compelling reason (para 6).
- Losing the election is not a material change in the circumstances that led to the resignation (para 6).
- Contesting as an official party candidate is inconsistent with the duty of political neutrality under the CCS (Conduct) Rules (para 7).
- Balram Gupta and Kamlesh Rani Bhatla were distinguished on their facts (para 8).
Judgment digest by NyayVidhan: a summary of the court's judgment, not its text. The judgment itself is the authoritative version.
Brief Facts
The petitioner, a Senior Auditor in the audit office for North Western Railway, resigned on 10.10.2023 to contest the Rajasthan Legislative Assembly election; the resignation was accepted on 01.11.2023 (para 3). He contested in November 2023 and lost, and on 01.01.2024 applied to withdraw his resignation and be reinstated (para 3). The department refused on 29.01.2024 and 22.02.2024, relying on Rule 26(5) of the CCS (Pension) Rules, 2021 and Rules 3(1)(vii) and 5 of the CCS (Conduct) Rules, 1964 (para 3). The Central Administrative Tribunal, Jaipur, dismissed his application on 27.02.2026, and he filed a writ petition (paras 1, 3).
Court's Findings
Rule 26(5) lets the appointing authority permit withdrawal of a resignation in the public interest only if the resignation was tendered for compelling reasons and the request follows a material change in the circumstances that compelled it (para 6). The petitioner resigned to contest the election, which was a voluntary act; his later discovery that he would lose pensionary benefits was not a compelling reason, and nothing had materially changed since the resignation (para 6). On the conduct rules, Rule 3(1)(vii) requires political neutrality at all times and Rule 5(1) bars association with a political party (para 7). Having contested as an official candidate of a party, he could not have remained politically neutral, and if allowed back he would be treated as in continuous service, so the prohibited activities would fall within his service (para 7). Balram Gupta concerned a request to withdraw voluntary retirement before it took effect, and Kamlesh Rani Bhatla turned on directions in an earlier round of litigation, so both were distinguishable (para 8).
Legal Principle
Under Rule 26(5) of the CCS (Pension) Rules, 2021, a resignation tendered voluntarily to contest an election cannot be withdrawn after losing it: defeat, or the loss of pension, is neither a compelling reason nor a material change in circumstances, and political activity in the interval is improper conduct (paras 6-7).
Precedents Relied Upon
- Balram Gupta v. Union of India & Anr. 1987 (Supp) SCC 228
There the employee sought to withdraw a voluntary-retirement notice before it took effect, and persistent personal requests from staff were treated as a change in circumstances.
- Govt. of NCT of Delhi & Ors. v. Kamlesh Rani Bhatla 2023 SCC OnLine SC 324
Decided on its peculiar facts, where the withdrawal application was decided in light of directions issued in an earlier round of litigation.