Punjab and Haryana HC orders to reinstate judicial officer who was dismissed over ‘misconduct’ as a lawyer
Hearing the matter, the bench noted that there is nothing on record except the complaint to infer that the integrity of the petitioner was doubtful due to any extraneous consideration or otherwise.
3 min read
The bench directed to upgrade the petitioner's 2015-16 ACR and reinstate him with immediate effect and full benefits. (Express Photo by Jasbir Malhi)
The Punjab and Haryana High Court has ordered to reinstate an Additional District and Sessions Judge, who was dismissed from service in March 2022, during the probation period, on account of “doubtful integrity”.
The petitioner, Prem Kumar, had moved the high court seeking quashing of the order dated April 18, 2022 and April 20, 2022, whereby his services were dispensed with. He had also sought quashing of the ACR (Annual Confidential Report) for the year 2015-16; the order dated December 3, 2021, whereby the representation of the petitioner was rejected, and the order dated March 7, 2022, withdrawing the judicial work from the petitioner.
A division bench of Chief Justice Sheel Nagu and Justice Sudhir Singh, directed the respondents to upgrade the ACR of the petitioner for the year 2015-16, and to re-instate him in service with immediate effect with all consequential benefits.
It was alleged that the petitioner, while practicing as a lawyer, in connivance with a woman had got registered a false FIR in 2012 for rape against a person. He was then given ‘B+ Good’ grading in the ACR for the year 2014-15 and in the integrity column, it was mentioned: ‘good, subject to the outcome of the pending complaint’.
After a preliminary enquiry, the high court’s OSD (Vigilance), Haryana, in May 2016 concluded that the conduct of petitioner was found to be an act of professional misconduct. This led to him being graded ‘C (integrity doubtful)’ in the ACR for 2015-16. In 2019, he was informed that proceedings in the 2014 complaint was being dropped on the recommendations of the Vigilance/Disciplinary Committee. He was advised to be careful in future and his ACR for 2014-15 was also confirmed as ‘B+ Good’. However, the ACR for 2015-16 was finalized as ‘C-Integrity Doubtful’. Consequently, his judicial work was withdrawn and the Punjab government terminated him on the recommendation of the full court.
Hearing the matter, the bench noted that there is nothing on record except the complaint to infer that the integrity of the petitioner was doubtful due to any extraneous consideration or otherwise. The HC asserted that the Full Court decision passed in 2021 and the recommendations of the Recruitment and Promotion Committee (Superior Judicial Service) made in 2022, approved by the Full Court in 2022, did not notice the dropping of the proceedings in the complaint filed and treating the ACR of the petitioner as ‘B+Good’ as final, for the year 2014-15.
“Therefore, applying the same ratio, which was made basis for treating the provisional remarks recorded in the ACR for the year 2014-15 as final, the remarks recorded in the ACR for the year 2015-16 do not hold the ground and, therefore, there being no material except the complaint ,the proceedings wherein were dropped, the said remarks could not have been made the basis,” said the bench, while allowing the petition.
You May Like
Photos
