'If you don’t allow lawyers to argue, you can dispose of all cases everyday’ : SC upholds extension of suspension of former Chandigarh DRT Presiding Officer

The Supreme Court on Thursday, dismissed a petition filed by M.M. Dhonchak, former Presiding Officer of the Debt Recovery Tribunal (DRT), Chandigarh, challenging the extension of his suspension.

A Bench of Justice Vikram Nath and Justice Sandeep Mehta rejected Dhonchak’s contention that he was being unfairly penalized despite his long service record and high case disposal rate.

During the hearing, the Court expressed serious reservations about Dhonchak’s functioning. Justice Sandeep Mehta observed, “On the face of it, he does not want advocates to present cases. He can simply run matters under a lawnmower. Where is the statutory right to remain in office while an inquiry is pending?”.

When counsel for Dhonchak highlighted his disposal rate as among the highest, Justice Nath responded, “That’s the best! If you don’t allow lawyers to argue, you can dispose of all cases every day". Dhonchak had approached the High Court earlier, alleging that his suspension stemmed from false complaints made by members of the Bar who found him unaccommodating. He claimed that his firm approach to judicial proceedings was misinterpreted as misconduct.

The Union Government opposed the plea, arguing that the action was based on written complaints by the DRT Bar Association, adverse administrative notings, and official reports concerning his conduct. It was contended that no officer could demand continuation in service as a matter of right, particularly while disciplinary proceedings were pending.

A Single Judge Bench of the Punjab & Haryana High Court dismissed his petition against the extension of suspension, holding that reinstating him could compromise the fairness of the inquiry. A Division Bench later upheld the decision, terming the allegations against him “grave” and prejudicial to public interest.

Affirming the High Court’s view, the Supreme Court held that adequate material was available before the competent authority to continue the suspension. The Bench observed, “Tested on the settled principles of law, no infirmity can be found in the order extending the suspension of the appellant".

The Court further directed that it would be for the competent authority to ensure smooth functioning of the Tribunal so that litigants do not suffer during the pendency of the disciplinary process.

The dispute surrounding Dhonchak has a history. In 2022, the Punjab & Haryana High Court had restrained him from issuing adverse orders following allegations of hostility toward lawyers. The Top Court later modified that order, permitting him to decide cases on merits but leaving the broader bench–bar issues to be addressed by the DRAT Chairperson. The Court had also advised both sides to maintain institutional decorum.