Discharge of probationers is considered punitive when based on allegations of misconduct, requiring a proper inquiry under Article 311(2) of the Constitution.

JUDGMENT :

(Delivered by Hon’ble Manish Mathur, J.)

1. These petitions have been placed before this Full Bench due to difference of opinion between two Hon'ble Judges earlier hearing the matters.

2. Considering the same, vide order dated 11.12.2018 records were required to be placed before Hon'ble the Chief Justice for nomination of Larger Bench in terms of Chapter VIII Rule 3 of ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT RULES 1952 whereafter the Full Bench has been constituted in terms of order dated 13.11.2019 and reconstituted vide order dated 16.8.2023 by Hon'ble the Chief Justice. Vide order dated 12.8.2021, writ petitions No. 1502 (S/B) of 2014 (now Writ A No. 2001502 of 2014) titled Sudhir Mishra versus State of U.P. and others and Writ Petition No.1356 (S/B) of 2015 (now Writ A No. 2001356 of 2015) titled Mukesh Kumar versus State of U.P. and others were directed to be leading petitions of the Bunch. However subsequently Writ Petition No. 1356 (S/B) of 2015 (now Writ A No. 2001356 of 2015) was dismissed as withdrawn vide order dated 31.1.2020 regarding petitioner No.2 Shobhit Sourav and survives regarding petitioner No.1 Mukesh Kumar and Writ Petition No. 1357 (S/B) of 2015 (now Writ A No. 2001357 of 2015) was dismissed as withdrawn vide order dated 12.8.2021 pertaining to petitioner No.1 Hirdesh Kumar and survives with regard to petitioner No.2 Himanshu Mishra.

3. Heard Mr. J.N. Mathur Senior Advocate assisted by Mr. Mudit Agarwal, Mr. Akhilesh Kalra, Mr. S.M. Singh Roykwar, Mr. Avinash Chandra, Advocates & Mr. Sandeep Dixit Senior Advocate assisted by Mr. V.S.Ojha Advocate appearing on behalf of petitioner and Mr. Gaurav Mehrotra Advocate as well as Mr. Ajay Kumar Singh Tomar learned State Counsel appearing on behalf of opposite parties.

4. Petitions have been filed assailing the order dated 22.9.2014 whereby services of petitioners have been discharged under Rule 24(4) of the U.P. Judicial Service Rules, 2001. In certain petitions, the inquiry report dated 12.9.2014 and the proceedings of Full Court dated 15.9.2014 have also been challenged.

5. In writ petition No. 1356(S/B) of 2015 (now writ A No. 2001356 of 2015) and writ petition No.1357 (S/B) of 2015 (now writ A No. 2001357 of 2015), order of discharge simpliciter dated 15.6.2015 and the Full Court resolution dated 23.5.2015 is under challenge.

6. Shorn of verbiage, facts of the case as narrated are that the petitioners after clearing the Provincial Civil Services (Judicial) Examination joined their posts of Additional Civil Judge in 2013 and at the time of passing of impugned order's were holding the post of Civil Judge (Junior Division). While discharging their functions as Civil Judge, an induction training programme was conducted for their batch in the Institute of Judicial Training and Research, Lucknow during the period 9.6.2014 to 8.9.2014. On the eve of last day of training i.e. 7.9.2014, the petitioners along with their colleagues numbering 15 persons went for dinner at the Charan Club and Resort situate on Faizabad Road, Lucknow.

7. As per contents of petitions, during the course of dinner, an altercation took place between Mr. Akhilesh Kumar Sharma and Mr. Asha Ram Pandey on one side and Mr. Ashwani Panwar, Mr. Bhanu Pratap Singh and Mr. Rahul Singh on the other side. It is stated that although the altercation resulted in a scuffle between the parties but the same was resolved amicably on the next day with the said persons apologizi