On Friday, the Supreme Court issued notice on a plea filed by a judicial officer challenging adverse observations made against her by the Gujarat High Court and the consequential suspension from service over allegedly contradictory orders passed in two delay condonation applications involving nearly twenty-two year’s delay, bringing into focus concerns surrounding procedural fairness in disciplinary action against judicial officers nearing retirement.
The controversy arose after the officer allegedly passed inconsistent orders in two separate applications seeking condonation of identical delays. While one application was allowed, the other was rejected. Appearing before the Apex Court, counsel for the Petitioner stressed that the officer had served the judiciary for twenty-six years with an “unblemished” and “blotless” record and was due to retire on July 2. It was argued that though the High Court was fully empowered to set aside or criticise a judicial order on merits, the grievance stemmed from personal remarks made against the officer and the suspension that followed. The Petitioner further alleged a complete absence of procedural safeguards, claiming that no notice, hearing, or opportunity to respond was granted before the action was taken.
The Bench comprising Chief Justice of India Surya Kant, Justice Joymalya Bagchi and Justice Vipul M Pancholi closely questioned the manner in which the contradictory orders had been passed. Justice Bagchi orally observed that the inconsistency had “shocked” the conscience of the Court and could shake public confidence in the judiciary. Referring to the identical nature of the delay applications, the Bench remarked, “when you pass a wrong order, it is okay, but when you pass a shocking order, it shakes the faith of people in judiciary.” The Petitioner, while admitting the mistake, urged the Court not to let a single error overshadow her entire judicial career and appealed, “I always lived in a dignified manner, may I retire in a dignified manner.”
Without granting immediate relief, the Apex Court issued notice in the matter.
Disclaimer: This news/ article includes information received via a syndicated news feed. The original rights remain with the respective publisher.
Picture Source :