Back
PANKAJ MITHAL, SANJEEV KUMAR
Javid Ahmad Naik – Appellant
Versus
State of J&K – Respondent
Judgment :
Sanjeev Kumar, J.
The petitioner, who was serving as Munsiff Pulwama in Kashmir Division, was removed from the judicial service by the Governor of the then State of Jammu and Kashmir vide Government Order No.3337-LD(A) of 2019 dated 23.07.2019 [“the impugned order’]. The impugned order has been passed by the Governor on the recommendations of the Full Court that the petitioner, in view of his proven misconduct, was not worthy of retention in the judicial service.
2. Feeling aggrieved, the petitioner has invoked the extraordinary writ jurisdiction of this Court seeking quashment of the impugned order as also the enquiry report dated 06.07.2018 and a show cause notice issued by this Court proposing penalty of removal of the petitioner from service vide Registrar General’s communication No. 49220/GS dated 31.12.2018. The petitioner additionally seeks to assail the recommendations made by the Full Court to the Governor of then State of Jammu and Kashmir for imposition of penalty of his removal from the judicial service. The petitioner also prays for a writ of mandamus to command the respondents to treat him in service with all consequential service benefits.
3. Before we advert
: Authority competent to impose penalty of dismissal, removal or reduction in rank alone is supposed to arrive at provisional conclusion in regard to penalty to be imposed after enquiry against Gover....
Judicial officers must maintain impeccable integrity; disciplinary actions must be based on established misconduct without procedural violations and adhere to high standards of justice.
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....
The main legal point established in the given judgment is that the power of judicial review discharged by the High Court under Article 226 is distinct from the Appellate power exercised by a Departme....
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 High Court does not act as an appellate authority in disciplinary matters and will not interfere with the quantum of punishment unless it is shocking to the conscience.
Article 235 of Constitution of India is control over subordinate courts.
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
