Back
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR
INDERJEET SINGH, RAVI CHIRANIA
Govind Agarwal – Appellant
Versus
High Court of Judicature, Rajasthan High Court Jodhpur at Jaipur through Registrar General – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. judicial service demands impeccable integrity. (Para 1) |
| 2. petitioner claims unblemished service record. (Para 2 , 4 , 5) |
| 3. arguments address procedural failures and explanations. (Para 3 , 6 , 7 , 11) |
| 4. court emphasizes limited scope of judicial review. (Para 8 , 9 , 10 , 19 , 20 , 21 , 22 , 23 , 25 , 26 , 27 , 28 , 31 , 32 , 33) |
| 5. respondent emphasizes validity of charge-sheet. (Para 12 , 13 , 15 , 17 , 18) |
| 6. high standards of conduct are critical for judicial officers. (Para 14 , 24 , 30) |
| 7. writ petition is dismissed. (Para 35 , 36) |
ORDER :
Ravi Chirania, J.
1. The present writ petition has been filed by a Judicial Officer who has challenged his punishment order dated 05.08.2013, therefore, two observations as made by the Hon’ble Supreme Court with regard to judicial service, in two different judgments, being relevant for the case, are quoted as under:-
“Judicial Service is not a service in the sense of an employment. Judges are discharging their functions while exercising the sovereign judicial power of the State. Their honesty and integrity is expected to be beyond doubt. It should be reflected in their overall reputation”.
Another observation as made by the Hon’b
Judicial officers must maintain impeccable integrity; disciplinary actions must be based on established misconduct without procedural violations and adhere to high standards of justice.
Judicial officers are held to a strict standard of integrity, and misconduct, including attempts to influence judicial proceedings, justifies removal from service after a fair inquiry process.
The decision to compulsorily retire a judicial officer in public interest is based on the entire service records, especially adverse entries relating to integrity, and requires circumspection in judi....
The court emphasized the importance of maintaining discipline and the requirement to prove prejudice in cases of non-serving of enquiry report, affirming the authority's discretion in disciplinary pr....
The findings in the criminal and departmental proceedings were based on the same set of facts, and acquittal in a criminal case does not automatically entitle the individual to relief in departmental....
Judicial review in disciplinary matters is limited; courts cannot reassess evidence or interfere unless findings are arbitrary or unsupported by evidence.
Disciplinary action necessitates adherence to statutory rules, including providing a disagreement note when diverging from inquiry findings, as failure to do so violates principles of natural justice....
(1) Punishment – Power of judicial review conferred on Constitutional Court is not that of an appellate authority but is confined only to decision-making process – Interference with decision of depar....
The court upheld the dismissal of the petitioner, emphasizing adherence to natural justice and the limited scope of judicial review in disciplinary proceedings.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
