2024:BHC-AS:18633-DB IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO.15539 OF 2022 Aniruddha Ganesh Pathak, Aged about 52 years, Occ: Nil, R/o: Mrudugandh, Jattharpeth, Akola, Tahsil and District Akola. ..Petitioner Versus

1. Registrar General, Bombay High Court, Bombay.

2. State of Maharashtra, Through its Secretary, Law and Judiciary Department, Madam Kama Road, Hutatma Rajguru Chowk, Mantralaya, Mumbai – 400 032. ..Respondents __________

Mr. Abhijeet A. Desai a/w. Mr. Vijay Singh, Ms. Daksha Punghera & Mr.

Ankit Jadhav i/by. Desai Legal for the Petitioner.

Mr. Rajesh S. Datar for Respondent No.1-High Court.

Mr. A. R. Deolekar, AGP for Respondent No.2-State.

__________

CORAM : A. S. CHANDURKAR &

JITENDRA JAIN, JJ.

Date on which the Arguments were concluded : 18^th APRIL 2024. Date on which the Judgment is pronounced : 23^rd APRIL 2024.

Judgment :- (Per Jitendra Jain, J.)

1. Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. Heard finally by consent of the parties.

2. This Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India is filed to quash the order No. DAJ 1521/768/CR 159/Desk-3, Law and Judiciary Department, Govt. of Maharashtra dated 14^th January 2022 passed by the Respondent No.2–Secretary, Law and Judiciary Department, Mumbai ordering removal of the Petitioner from judicial service and further seeks directions for reinstatement in service with consequential benefits.

Brief facts are as under:-

3. On 19^th March 2010, the Petitioner was appointed as a Civil Judge Junior Division. During the tenure of his service, the Petitioner was posted at various districts till the date of his removal.

4. Pursuant to the complaints with regard to the conduct of the Petitioner, Principal District and Sessions Judge, Nandurbar on 17^th February 2017 filed a report with the office of Respondent No.1. In the said report, it was stated that from the appearance and body language, the Petitioner appeared to be an abnormal person and further several complaints of his conduct and behaviour were received by the District Judge at Shahada. The complaints inter alia related to his misbehaviour and not attending the Court, thereby lowering reputation of judiciary. A confidential letter to the said effect was also sent by the District Judge. In the said report, it is also stated that many staff members have complained that the Petitioner would arrive in the Court under the influence of liquor. The report also states that the Members of the Bar Association met Principal District Judge and putforth their grievances which were on the same lines as stated above. The said grievances were brought to the notice of the then Guardian Judge of Nandubar District.

The said report was accompanied by copy of complaint of Shahada Bar Association and two confidential reports of District Judge.

5. The Shahada Bar Association on 25^th March 2017 passed a Resolution in relation to the behaviour of the Petitioner and his Court functioning and same was forwarded to the Guardian Judge and requested that the Petitioner be sent on leave.

6. On 2^nd May 2017, District Judge, Jalgaon filed a discreet enquiry report in respect of complaints against the Petitioner. The said report was forwarded to Respondent No.1. In the said report, District Judge has given a first hand narration of his visit on 29^th April 2017 to the Court premises at Shahada Court. On that date, the learned District Judge was in the Court premises from morning 10:15 a.m. till 6:10 p.m. observing the behaviour and conduct of the Petitioner in the Court and outside the Court. During the said visit, it was found that the Petitioner entered into Court at 11:17 a.m. and around 70 matters were fixed on criminal board. However, the Petitioner unilaterally adjourned the matters without consulting Advocate or litigants and at 12:20 p.m. rose from the Dais. After some time, the Petitioner sat in the room of Clerk and was entertaining Advocates, litigants etc. in that room. He was found loitering around the C