Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:41299 Court No. - 5 Case :- WRIT - A No. - 7352 of 2025 Petitioner :- Ashutosh Kumar Pandey Respondent :- Bank Of India Thru. Chairman And Managing Director And 3 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Arun Kumar Pandey,I.M. Pandey Ist Counsel for Respondent :- Nitin Srivastava Hon'ble Abdul Moin,J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri Nitin Srivastava, learned counsel appearing for all the respondents. 2. With the consent of learned counsel for the parties, the instant writ petition is being finally decided. 3. Under challenge is the order dated 25.02.2025, as communicated vide e-mail dated 25.03.2025, as contained in Annexure-6 to the petition, whereby the petitioner's application for resignation has been rejected. 4. The argument of learned counsel for the petitioner is that the resignation application has been rejected on the ground that no officer shall resign from the service otherwise than on expiry of three months from the service of a notice in writing on the bank of such resignation as per the provisions of Regulation 20 of the Bank of India (Officers') Service Regulations, 1979 (hereinafter referred to as 'Regulations, 1979'). The petitioner, having submitted his resignation by clearly indicating that he did not wish to serve the notice period of three months, as such the competent authority, while rejecting the said application, should have considered the proviso to Regulation 20(2) of the Regulations, 1979, which categorically provides that the competent authority may reduce the period of three months or remit the requirement of notice. 5. The contention is that the pedantic rejection of the petitioner’s resignation letter without even referring to or considering the proviso of Regulation 20(2) of the Regulations, 1979, is patent non-application of mind on the part of the competent authority. 6. Responding, Sri Nitin Srivastava, learned counsel for the respondents, does not dispute the provision to Regulation 20 of the Regulations, 1979, but states that as five loans have been sanctioned by the petitioner at a lesser rate of interest, consequently the matter is being examined. However, he prays that the competent authority may be permitted to pass a fresh order on the resignation application submitted by the petitioner. 7. Considering the aforesaid, the communication dated 25.03.2025, a copy of which is annexure-6 to the petition, is set aside. 8. It is open for the competent authority to pass a fresh order, in accordance with law. 9. Let such an order be passed within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order. 10. With the aforesaid observation/ direction, the writ petition stands disposed of. [Abdul Moin, J.] Order Date :- 18.7.2025 cks/- Digitally signed by :- CHANDRA KANT SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench