Hon’ble Krishna Murari, J.—Petitioner is a Judicial Officer. He was initially appointed on 3.9.1984 as Additional Munsif and was posted at Hardoi. He was promoted as Civil Judge (Sr. Div.) on 26.8.1993. Further promotion to the post of Additional District & Sessions Judge was accorded to him on 17.5.2001, and he was confirmed as such on 25.5.2005, which post he continues to hold. Petitioner was awarded an adverse entry on 2.7.2005 for the year 2004-2005. Representations filed against it were rejected. Being aggrieved, he has filed the present writ petition with the following prayers :

(i) A writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari quashing the adverse remark contained in column No. 1(a), 1(b), 1(f) and 2 in annual confidential remark for the year 2004-05 as awarded by the District Judge, Sahjahanpur on 2.7.2005 (Annexure-2 to the writ petition) as also the communications of the Registrar (Confidential) dated 19.9.2007 and 3.6.2008 (Annexures-5 and 7 to the writ petition) as also the orders on which the said communications are based.

(ii) A writ, order or direction of a suitable nature commanding the respondents to produce the orders passed by the Administrative Judge and the Administrative Committee on the representations of the petitioner and to quash the same.

(iii) A writ, order or direction of a suitable nature commanding the respondents to treat the entry for the year 2004-05 as a satisfactory entry and also to treat the integrity of the petitioner as certified for the said period”.

2. The petitioner has put in nearly thirty years of service as a Judicial Officer. During the relevant period, i.e. 1.4.2004 to 31.3.2005, petitioner was posted as Additional District Judge, Shahjahanpur, in different capacities. He decided 173 Sessions Trial during this period, including Sessions Trial No. 297 of 1995 (State v. Laik and others). The then District Judge, Shahjahanpur, after he was transferred to Moradabad, awarded following Annual Remarks to petitioner on 2.7.2005 :

3. It is undisputed that except for the year 2004-2005, the service record of the petitioner has been unblemished and his working as a Judicial Officer has always been satisfactory. However, the impugned adverse entry has resulted in petitioner’s super-session by thirty junior officers, in January, 2014, for the post of District Judge, and by 179 junior officers, for grant of selection grade, in March, 2014.

4. Upon being communicated of the entry dated 2.7.2005, petitioner submitted a representation against it on 8.8.2005. Petitioner challenged the adverse entry on various grounds and also stated that the then District Judge was biased against him, as petitioner had declined to implicate an officer, despite oral instructions of the District Judge, since no incriminating material was available on record against the said officer, which infuriated the then District Judge resulting in award of adverse entry. Details, in this regard, were furnished. The representation was forwarded by the District Judge to this Court. However, the petitioner was informed vide communication dated 19.9.2007, by the Registrar (Confidential) that his representation has been rejected by the Hon’ble Administrative Judge. Petitioner, thereafter, submitted further representation to this Court, on the administrative side, on 30.10.2007. Petitioner, however, in his subsequent representation stated that he has realized, and has even been made to realize, that his comments about the then District Judge should not have been made, and as such he tendered his apology on this count. The other contents of the previous representation, nevertheless, were pressed. The representation of the petitioner was considered by the Administrative Committee, and was rejected and communicated to the petitioner by the Registrar (Confidential) vide his letter dated 3.6.2008 through the District Judge, Muzaffar Nagar, where petitioner was posted. The adverse entry dated 2.7.2005 awarded by the Distri