stated also the practice followed, in his experience, in such cases, He, presumably thought that the resignation was effective from 14-1-1971. Shri Kapur also acted upon that assumption and in that belief. The Prime Minister, who could not be expected to examine suo moto the question whether Shri P.N. Haksar and Shri Kapur were right in their beliefs about the effectiveness of the resignation, assumed that everything was alright. In any case, there could not possibly, on these facts, be any means read on her part. 430. The learned Judge having accepted, on the unimpeachable evidence of the date of notification of 25-1-1971 published in the official gazette on 6-21971 that Shri Kapur must have handed in his resignation in a letter of 13-11971. It is very difficult to see how one could possibly doubt the correctness of the statement of Shri P.N. Haksar that, as the Head of the Prime Minister's Secretariat he had accepted the resignation orally and forwarded it for necessary action. The resignation had taken place with the consent of the Prime Minister. It is inconceivable, in the circumstances, that Shri P.N. Haksar would not have, as the Head of the Department in which Shri Kapur was working agreed to relieve him of his duties by telling him that he was a free man, and, thereby, accepted his resignation. He very honestly, stated that he does not remember whether he wrote anything on the margin of that letter. He must have made so many endorsements on so many letters and documents that it was expecting the impossible to hold that he must remember what he wrote on every one of them. The only other ground given by the learned Judge for doubting the correctness of this version, which completely accords with the natural and ordinary course of official business was that the additional written statement filed a year after the original written statement, mentions this, fact for the first time. It seems to me that the learned Judge was carrying his suspicions to excessive lengths. The real question involved was the legal effect of the facts accepted by the learned Judge to be correct. These were: firstly, that such a letter of resignations was handed in on 13-1-1971 by Shri Kapur to Shri Haksar asking to be allowed to resign with effect from 14-1-1971; and, secondly, this very request was accepted by the President of India and incorporated in a notification dated 25-1-1971. 431. The learned Judge had found Shri P.N. Haksar's statement that such an oral acceptance followed by the necessary notification afterwards, was “rather interesting”, and, that the resignation could not be effective until 251-1971, the date of drafting the notification. But, what the learned Judge completely over-looked was that the notification itself made the resignation effective from 14-1-1971, the date from which Shri Kapur had neither worked in the Prime Minister's Secretariat nor drawn any salary There was no plea anywhere, and there is no express finding on it that the President's notification itself, which made the resignation effective from 14-1-1971, was invalid to the extent that it purported to give any retrospective effect to the resignation, in the sense that it made it effective from a date prior to its actual acceptance. The fact that it is made effective from 14-1-1971 shows