SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
H.L. Gokhale, Dipak Misra, JJ.
Registrar General High Court of Gujarat & Anr. – Appellants
Versus
Jayshree Chamanlal Buddhbhatti – Respondent
CIVIL APPEAL NO. 9346 OF 2013 (@ out of SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (CIVIL) NO. 17215/2009 )
Decided On : 22-10-2013
AIR 1958 SC 36; (1970) 2 SCC 871; AIR 1974 SC 2192: (1974) 2 SCC 831; (1984) 2 SCC 369; (2000) 5 SCC 152; (2010) 8 SCC 220 - Relied upon
(1998) 3 SCC 225; (1999) 2 SCC 21; AIR 2000 SC 22: (2000) 1 SCC 416 - Distinguished
(b) Service Law - Judicial Officers - Role of High Court - Unjustified allegations by Bar against Judicial Officers - High Court ought to see through and protect honest judicial officers. (Para 29)
(1988) 3 SCC 370 - Relied upon
Facts of the case:
In this appeal the respondent - terminated Civil Judge - has challenged his termination.
Finding of the Court:
There is no infirmity in the impugned order.
Result : Appeal dismissed.
JUDGEMENT
H.L. Gokhale J.
Leave Granted.
2. This appeal by Special Leave seeks to challenge the judgment and order rendered by a Division Bench of Gujarat High Court dated 15.5.2009, allowing the Special Civil Application No.2880 of 2008, filed by the respondent herein.
3. The appeal raises the question with respect to the disputed termination of services of the respondent herein as a Civil Judge, Junior Division, in the Gujarat Judiciary. The impugned judgment has accepted the contention of the respondent that the termination of her services was a stigmatic one, and she was removed from her services after an inquiry in which she was not informed of the charges against her, nor was she given the opportunity of being heard in respect of those charges, which are the minimum requirements under Article 311 (2) of the Constitution of India. As against that, the contention of the appellants has been that the respondent’s service was discontinued during the period of her probation, since she was not found suitable for the post she was holding, and it was not a stigmatic termination to attract Article 311 (2) of the Constitution of India.
Facts leading to this appeal are this wise:-
4. The respondent appeared for the selection for the post of a Civil Judge, Junior Division, in the year 2003, and obtained 7th rank out of 84 candidates, and was appointed as a Civil Judge on 2.3.2005. To begin with, she was placed on probation for a period of two years. Her initial posting was at Rajkot to undergo the training alongwith the District Judge. Subsequent thereto, she was given a full-fledged posting as a Civil Judge and Judicial Magistrate First Class, at Kodinar District Junagadh, by the order of the High Court dated 30.12.2005. She took the charge of the said post on 7.1.2006.
5. It is her case that she was discharging her duties faithfully and sincerely, but in the course of her work she found that some of her subordinate staff members were not conducting themselves properly, and were involved in taking the court papers outside the court premises, which was something that could not be permitted. She wrote letters to the then District Judge, Junagadh Mr. B.U. Joshi, on 16.5.2006 and 19.5.2006, with respect to the difficulties faced by her, due to the behavior of the subordinate staff, and amongst other things she recorded this particular conduct on their part. There was no response to these letters, but she received adverse remarks, vide the letter dated 19.9.2006, addressed by the Registrar (Administration) of the High Court of Gujarat. The said letter read as follows:-
“Confidential
J.C. Upadhyay
Registrar (Administration)
High Court of Gujarat, at Sola
Ahmedabad-380 060
No. A. 0722/82
Dated 19.9.2006
To
Miss J.C. Buddhabhatti,
Principal Civil Judge and
Judicial Magistrate,
First Class, Kodinar
Through: The Principal District Judge, Junagadh
Subject: Adverse remark- Communication of …
Madam,
With reference to the subject noted above, I am directed by the Hon’ble the Acting Chief Justice and Judges, to state that the following remarks have been passed in the Confidential Report in Form No. III in respect of you:-
(4) Personal characteristics:
(8) Politeness and courtesy Required improvement
(5) The District Judge’s Assessment Of the Civil Judge regarding his/her-
(x) Attitude towards the public and the bar Requires improvement
I am, therefore, directed by their Lordships to request you to be so good as to try to show improvement in these respects in future.
Yours faithfully
Sd/-
Registrar (Admn.)”
6. The respondent replied to the said communication by her letter dated 14.11.2006, in which she pointed out that the disposal of cases by her had been good. She had disposed of 509 Civil and 1619 Criminal cases totaling to 2128 cases during the period January 2006 to October 2006. She stated in her letter that it would not have been possible to do so without her good attitude, and also without the cooperation of the bar and public. In any event, she assured in her reply th
Oswal Pressure Die Casting Industry v. Presiding Officer
Radhey Shyam Gupta v. U.P. State Agro Industries Corporation Ltd.
High Court of Judicature at Bombay v. Sashikant S. Patil
Parshotam Lal Dhingra v. Union of India
Shamsher Singh v. State of Punjab
Anoop Jaiswal v. Govt. of India
Chandra Prakash Shahi v. State of U.P.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.