Judicial review in disciplinary matters is limited to violations of procedure and natural justice, not merits of evidence.

JUDGMENT :

Sushrut Arvind Dharmadhikari, J.

The present intra-court appeal filed under Section 5 of the Kerala High Court Act , 1958, assails the judgment dated 10.03.2015 passed in W.P(C)No.21317 of 2009, whereby the learned Single Judge has dismissed the writ petition.

2. The brief facts of the case are that the appellant was working as District Judge. He was dismissed from service vide order dated 26.05.2007 (Ext.P23). The appellant had also challenged Ext.P2 dated 10.10.2001 in the writ petition, whereby he was suspended by the High Court of Kerala and also challenged the consequential disciplinary proceedings initiated against him as well as Ext.P23 order by which he was dismissed from service.

3. The appellant had entered into subordinate judiciary of the State as a Munsiff in the year 1983, pursuant to selection made by the Kerala Public Service Commission in a special recruitment conducted for Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribe candidates. Thereafter the appellant was promoted as Sub Judge in the year 1989 and subsequently promoted as District Judge in the year 1998. Satisfactory completion of his probation in the cadre of District Judge was declared in the year 2000. While the appellant was working in the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Thiruvananthapuram, he was suspended from service with effect from 10.10.2001. Being aggrieved, the appellant had challenged the suspension order dated 10.10.2001 (Ext.P2) in O.P.No .30922 of 2001 which was dismissed in limine vide judgment dated 16.10.2001 (Ext.P3).

4. The order of the learned Single Judge was confirmed by a Division Bench in a Writ Appeal No.3874 of 2001 vide judgment dated 03.12.2001 (Ext.P4). Thereafter a preliminary inquiry was conducted against the appellant through the Registrar (Vigilance), High Court of Kerala. Based on the preliminary enquiry report, a show cause notice was issued to the appellant, intimating proposal for initiating disciplinary action under Rule 15 of the Kerala Civil Services (Classification, Control & Appeal) Rules, 1960 (hereinafter referred to as ‘CCA Rules’ for short) and called for his explanations, if any. The appellant thereafter submitted a detailed reply to Ext.P5 notice, vide Ext.P6 dated 01.12.2001. The appellant filed an appeal against the order of suspension under Rule 22 of the CCA Rules. Additionally one application for revocation of suspension was also filed. The appeal as well as the request for revocation of suspension was declined vide Ext.P9 order dated 02.08.2002. Ex.P10 Memo of Charges dated 18.02.2002 was issued to the appellant containing statement of allegations. The appellant filed a written statement of defence vide Ext.P11. During the pendency of the said proceedings another ‘Memo of Charge’ enclosing detailed ‘statement of allegations’ was issued against the appellant as per Ext.P12. The appellant again submitted a detailed written statement of defence as per Ext.P13. Thereafter a detailed enquiry was conducted by the District Judge as the Presiding Officer. On completion of the enquiry, a detailed enquiry report dated 16.03.2006 (Ext.P20) was submitted to the High Court, recommending dismissal of the appellant from the service, considering the grave nature of the charges proved against him. Based on the enquiry report, the High Court had issued a show cause notice dated 25.03.2006 (Ext.P21) proposing punishment of dismissal from service to which the appellant filed a detailed representation vide Ext.P22. Thereafter the High Court recommended his dismissal to the State Government based on which Ext.P23 order dated 26.05.2007 which is impugned in the writ petition was issued awarding penalty of