[CASE NUMBER] [ACT]: HONOURABLEMR[CASE NUMBER]JUSTICE[ENTITY] and [ENTITY] 1 WhetherReportersofLocalPapersmaybeallowed toseethejudgment? 2 TobereferredtotheReporterornot? 3 WhethertheirLordshipswishtoseethefaircopy ofthejudgment? 4 Whetherthiscaseinvolvesasubstantialquestion oflawastotheinterpretationofthe ConstitutionofIndia,1950oranyordermade thereunder? 5 Whetheritistobecirculatedtothecivil judge? [ENTITY] Petitioner(s) Versus [ENTITY] Respondent(s) Appearance: MR [ENTITY], SENIOR ADVOCATE WITH MR[CASE NUMBER] [ENTITY], ADVOCATEforthePetitioner(s)No[CASE NUMBER]1 [ENTITY],AGPfortheRespondent(s)No[CASE NUMBER]1 [ENTITY],ADVOCATEfortheRespondent(s)No[CASE NUMBER]2 [ENTITY],[ENTITY], ADVOCATEfortheRespondent(s)No[CASE NUMBER]2 CORAM:HONOURABLEMR[CASE NUMBER]JUSTICE[ENTITY] and [ENTITY] Date:0102/07/2014 Page 1 of 52 [CASE NUMBER] ORALJUDGMENT
(PER:HONOURABLEMR[CASE NUMBER]JUSTICE[ENTITY])
1[CASE NUMBER] The petitioner by this petition has prayed for quashingandsettingasidethenotificationdated 05[CASE NUMBER]10[CASE NUMBER]2011dismissingthepetitionerfromservice and the petitioner has prayed that he be reinstated in service with all consequential benefitsincludingbackwageswithinterest[CASE NUMBER]
2[CASE NUMBER] Theshortfactsofthecaseappeartobethatthe petitioner was appointed as Civil Judge (Junior Division)andJudicialMagistrate,FirstClasson 10[CASE NUMBER]06[CASE NUMBER]1991[CASE NUMBER]HewaspromotedtothepostofCivil Judge(SeniorDivision)on30[CASE NUMBER]03[CASE NUMBER]2002andhewas thereafterfurtherpromotedasAssistantJudgeon 30[CASE NUMBER]04[CASE NUMBER]2004[CASE NUMBER]Onaccountofthemergerofcadre,he was again placed as Civil Judge (SD)[CASE NUMBER] When he wasworkingasCivilJudge(SeniorDivision),at Veraval, a Chargesheet dated 10[CASE NUMBER]10[CASE NUMBER]2008 was served upon him alleging various charges[CASE NUMBER] The petitionersubmittedstatementofdefencedenying charges levelled against him[CASE NUMBER] Thereafter, inquirywasheld[CASE NUMBER] Theinquiryofficersubmitted reportdated11[CASE NUMBER]02[CASE NUMBER]2011holdingchargenos[CASE NUMBER]1,3, 4 and 5 proved and charge nos[CASE NUMBER]2 and 6 as not proved[CASE NUMBER] Afterinquiryreportwasreceivedby respondentno[CASE NUMBER]2,thecopyoftheinquiryreport wassuppliedtothepetitionerwithanoticeto showcauseastowhyheshouldnotbedismissed from service[CASE NUMBER] The petitioner submitted reply[CASE NUMBER] Thereafter,decisionwastakenbyrespondentno[CASE NUMBER]2 [CASE NUMBER] fordismissalofthepetitionerandnotification tothateffectwaspublishedon05[CASE NUMBER]10[CASE NUMBER]2011[CASE NUMBER] It isunderthesecircumstances,thepetitionerhas approachedthisCourtbythepresentpetition[CASE NUMBER]
3[CASE NUMBER] WehaveheardMr[CASE NUMBER][ENTITY],appearingwithMr[CASE NUMBER][ENTITY] for the petitioner and Mr[CASE NUMBER][ENTITY] appearing with Mr[CASE NUMBER] [ENTITY] for respondent no[CASE NUMBER]2[CASE NUMBER] Mr[CASE NUMBER][ENTITY], learned AGP for respondent no[CASE NUMBER]1hasadoptedallsubmissionsmadeonbehalf ofrespondentno[CASE NUMBER]2byMr[CASE NUMBER][ENTITY][CASE NUMBER]
4[CASE NUMBER] Inordertohavereadyreferenceofthecharges which are found to be proved, the same can be reproducedasunder:
ChargeI When Mr[CASE NUMBER][ENTITY] has took over the charge as a Principal Senior Civil Judge, Veraval on 01[CASE NUMBER]06[CASE NUMBER]2005, old matters were pending in this Court[CASE NUMBER]Outofwhich838LandReferenceCasesof pre 2001 were also ready and pending for disposal[CASE NUMBER]However,thedataofhisdisposalshows that during the period of one year he has disposedoffonly5SpecialSuits(OM),3Special Suits (Money), 9 Regular Suits (OM), 3 Regular Suits (Money) by judgment[CASE NUMBER] As against the disposaloftheseCivilSuits,hehasdisposedof 230 Land Reference Cases and 64 interlocutory applicationsbyjudgmentduringthisperiod[CASE NUMBER]
It is also found from the daily listing board [CASE NUMBER] that during the period from 1[CASE NUMBER]09[CASE NUMBER]2005 to 27[CASE NUMBER]04[CASE NUMBER]2006,19LandReferenceCaseswerepending for arguments in Mr[CASE NUMBER] [ENTITY]'s court, but these reference cases were not disposed off by him, tillhistransfer[CASE NUMBER]TheLandReferenceCasesNo[CASE NUMBER] 1130/99 and 1131/99, 1153/99, 304/99 to 336/99 were pending in his Court since 04[CASE NUMBER]01[CASE NUMBER]2006 and the arguments were also heard by him but these cases were not disposed off by him till his transfer[CASE NUMBER]
Asagainsttheabovereferredfacts,itisfound that,thoughhewasduefortransferinthemonth ofApril,2006,hehaddisposedof64freshLand ReferenceCasesbyprepondingthedateofhearing on25[CASE NUMBER]04[CASE NUMBER]2006[CASE NUMBER]Hehasdisposedoffthefollowing freshLandReferencesCases,outofwhichinLand Reference Case No[CASE NUMBER] 12/05 to 24/05, Mr[CASE NUMBER] [ENTITY] of the applicants and in rest of the matters Mr[CASE NUMBER][ENTITY] was an Advocate for the applicants[CASE NUMBER]
Sr[CASE NUMBER] Land Reference Case No[CASE NUMBER] Group of No[CASE NUMBER] matters[CASE NUMBER]
Itisalsofoundthatoutoftheabovereferred matters,almost29matterswerefiledbetweenthe monthofJuly,2005toSeptember2005andwritten [CASE NUMBER] statementswerefiledonbehalfoftheGovernment on 15[CASE NUMBER]12[CASE NUMBER]2005[CASE NUMBER] Though all these matters were keptforhearingon30[CASE NUMBER]01[CASE NUMBER]2006,hehadtakenup allthesemattersonboardon28[CASE NUMBER]12[CASE NUMBER]2005atthe instanceofapplicant'sadvocateanddraftissues werereceivedandaccordinglyframed[CASE NUMBER]Itisalso foundthatallthesematters,afterrecordingthe evidence of the applicants, were kept on 27[CASE NUMBER]04[CASE NUMBER]2006 for crossexamination of the applicant,butpriortothenextdateofhearing the said cases were taken up on board and the evidence was completed on 15[CASE NUMBER]04[CASE NUMBER]2006[CASE NUMBER] After completionofevidenceonetypedjudgmentof[CASE NUMBER] was given by him to Mr[CASE NUMBER][ENTITY], Gujarati Stenographer on 16[CASE NUMBER]04[CASE NUMBER]2005 i[CASE NUMBER]e[CASE NUMBER] on the very next day after completion of evidence, he instructed Mr[CASE NUMBER][ENTITY] to get it typed and fill up the gaps in the format judgment of [CASE NUMBER] for the other Land Reference Cases[CASE NUMBER]
Thus,hehasbygivinganawardonhigherside, given the financial benefit to the applicants with an oblique motive and for a consideration otherthanthejudicialone[CASE NUMBER]Hehasnotfollowed thesettledPrincipalofLawaswellasdifferent provisionsoftheActfordeterminingthemarket valueoftheacquiredlandandhehasonlyrelied upon the previous judgment of [CASE NUMBER] delivered by him in [CASE NUMBER] whichalsohehasconsideredandrelieduponhis own judgment delivered in [CASE NUMBER][CASE NUMBER]Thusfordecidinghighmarket priceintheabovereferredcases,hehasrelied onhisownpreviousjudgmentsandthereby,hehas createdchainofjudgments,whichisagainst,the principles of law settled by the Apex Court[CASE NUMBER] Thus,conductofMr[CASE NUMBER][ENTITY] theawardinthesaidReferenceCasesonhigher side, with an oblique motive and to give financial benefit to the applicants for which they were not entitled according to law, and thereby,hehascommittedgravemisconduct[CASE NUMBER]
Mr [ENTITY] also disposed off the following Land ReferenceCases[CASE NUMBER]Thedetailsofthestatementare givenasunder: STATEMENT SHOWING REMARKABLE ADDITIONAL AMOUNT AWARDED IN THE FOLLOWING LAND REFERENCE CASES:-
Sr[CASE NUMBER] LRC No[CASE NUMBER] Total LAQ Award by LAO Add[CASE NUMBER]Amt[CASE NUMBER] Date of Remark No No[CASE NUMBER] Awarded by disposal s [CASE NUMBER] the Judge
1[CASE NUMBER] 12/05 13 13/96 1,19,720/- 6,37,528/- 25/4/200
2[CASE NUMBER] 25/05 15 26/98 5,44,589/- 33,28,784/- -do-
to Matter 39/05 decided by 3[CASE NUMBER] 40/05 21 11/98 16,20,489/- 76,85,457/- -do- prepondi to ng 60/05 the date [CASE NUMBER] 4[CASE NUMBER] 61/05 03 24/98 1,98,468/- 11,83,032/- -do- to 5[CASE NUMBER] 64/05 01 10/08 9,899/- 1,28,246/- -do- 6[CASE NUMBER] 66/05 05 25/98 1,15,478/- 6,27,248/- -do- to 7[CASE NUMBER] 71/05 06 18/98 1,87,557/- 17,85,244/- -do- To Total 64 27,96,200/- 1,53,75,539/ - 8[CASE NUMBER] 59/99 8 to 68/99 11 20/79 23,74,238/- 4,59,84,751/- 24/03/06 to to 87/99 2 & 90/99 8 to 9[CASE NUMBER] 1167/99 30 24/88 1,47,387/- 10,75,524/- 03/01/06 to 1196/99 10[CASE NUMBER] 13/03 15 40/96 12,80,919/- 61,10,942/- -do- to 11[CASE NUMBER] 34/03 16 6/99 26,69,925/- 2,08,02,665/- 12/01/06 to 12[CASE NUMBER] 903/99 06 2/88 25,530/- 3,48,096/- 29/12/05 F[CASE NUMBER]A[CASE NUMBER]No[CASE NUMBER] to 1737/07 908/99 To 1747/07 13[CASE NUMBER] 1615/99 03 11/92 1,99,060[CASE NUMBER]50/- 14,23,246/- 30/11/05 F[CASE NUMBER]A[CASE NUMBER] No[CASE NUMBER] to 1745/07 1617/99 To 1747/07 14[CASE NUMBER] 1603/99 06 31/98 1,54,165/- 9,83,946/- 26/10/05 to 1606/99 15[CASE NUMBER] 26/04 06 31/98 9,78,375/- 35,93,209/- 09/08/05 Decided to within 15 31/04 days after framing issues[CASE NUMBER] 16[CASE NUMBER] 1138/99 to 1152/99 , 19 54/87 10,90,314/- 90,44,574/- 23/08/05 1154/99 , 1155/99 [CASE NUMBER] 1007/99 1487/99 Total 1,21,16,113/5 10,47,42,492 0 /-
Mr[CASE NUMBER][ENTITY]hasalsodisposedof32LandReference Cases bearing Nos[CASE NUMBER] 59/99 to 66/99, 68/99 to 78/99,80/99to85/99,87/99,88/99and90/99to 97/99[CASE NUMBER]Thesaidreferenceswereinitiatedbythe original owner of the acquired land of Village Amrapur,Taluka:MaliyaHatinaagainsttheAward No[CASE NUMBER]20/79inwhichnotificationundersection4 waspublishedon10[CASE NUMBER]09[CASE NUMBER]1981[CASE NUMBER]Thesaidreferences wereoriginallydecidedbyMr[CASE NUMBER][ENTITY],thethen Civil Judge, Senior Division, Veraval on 15[CASE NUMBER]03[CASE NUMBER]2000 after considering the evidence on record[CASE NUMBER] The market value of the said acquired landwasfixedatRs[CASE NUMBER]313/perAreforirrigated landandRs[CASE NUMBER]219perArefornonirrigatedland[CASE NUMBER]
The said judgment was challenged by the [CASE NUMBER] before the High Court[CASE NUMBER] The original claimants had not filed any appeals nor they challengedthesaidjudgmentbywayoffilingthe cross objection and thereby, they had accepted the award passed by Mr[CASE NUMBER][ENTITY] but the advocates fortheapplicantsduringthehearingagreedto remandthesaidmattersforretrialinhisCourt[CASE NUMBER] Thesaidremandedmatterscameupforhearingon 03[CASE NUMBER]08[CASE NUMBER]2005 in his Court and he has determined highmarketpriceattherateof734perArefor irrigated land and Rs[CASE NUMBER] 550 per Are for non irrigatedlandandinthatwayhehasawardedthe [CASE NUMBER] amountofcompensationonhigherside[CASE NUMBER]Thewayin which the consent for remand the matters was given,thoughitwasnotchallengedbythem,and thereafter the way in which all these matters weredisposedoffbyawardinghugeamountshows hisobliquemotive[CASE NUMBER]
Mr[CASE NUMBER][ENTITY] has also disposed off [CASE NUMBER] the original owners of the acquired land of VillageDhusiya,Taluka:Talala[CASE NUMBER]Byoverlooking the evidence on record and also misinterpreting thedocumentaryevidenceproducedbytheparties[CASE NUMBER] Hehasawardedcompensationonhighersidesoas togivefinancialbenefittotheapplicantsfor whichtheywereinfactnotentitledaccordingto law[CASE NUMBER]Hehasalsogiventhehandwrittenjudgment to Mr[CASE NUMBER][ENTITY], Gujarati Stenographer on 78 9/12/2005togetittyped[CASE NUMBER]However,theRojnama dated12[CASE NUMBER]12[CASE NUMBER]2005speaksthatadditionalargument on behalf of the Government was heard on 12[CASE NUMBER]12[CASE NUMBER]2005[CASE NUMBER]Thus,italsocreatesdoubtabouthis integrityandthewayinwhichhehasdisposedof the said references cases shows that with an obliquemotiveandtogivefinancialbenefitto the applicants he has passed awards on higher side[CASE NUMBER]
Mr[CASE NUMBER][ENTITY]asaPrincipalSeniorCivilJudgehave alsodecidedthefollowingLandReferencesCases;
[CASE NUMBER] Sr[CASE NUMBER] No[CASE NUMBER] Land References Cases Nos[CASE NUMBER] Amount Awarded 1[CASE NUMBER] 903/99 to 908/99 Rs[CASE NUMBER]300 Per Are 2[CASE NUMBER] 1615/99 to 1617/99 Rs[CASE NUMBER]875 Per Are as an additional compensation 3[CASE NUMBER] 26/2004 to 31/2004 Rs[CASE NUMBER]1875 Per Are 4[CASE NUMBER] 1138/99 to 1152/99 Rs[CASE NUMBER]2438[CASE NUMBER]50 paisa 1154/99 and 1155/99 per Are[CASE NUMBER] 1007/99 , 1487/99 5[CASE NUMBER] 1721/99 Rs[CASE NUMBER]1600 per Are[CASE NUMBER]
In the above referred matters without scrutinizing the evidence on record and before relying on the previous judgment of either adjoining Village or of the same Village, Mr[CASE NUMBER][ENTITY] has not compared the evidence in referencetothedevelopmentofboththeVillages andstraightwayfixedtheamountofcompensation onhighersidewithanobliquemotiveandtogive financialbenefitstotheapplicantsandthereby he has overlooked the principals of law, other factorsandalsotheappropriatemethodforthe valuation of the land and thereby he has committed misconduct and dereliction in his judicialduties[CASE NUMBER]
Thus, in all the above referred Land Reference Cases for fixing the market value of the land, Mr[CASE NUMBER][ENTITY] has under the pretext of previous judgmentrelieduponhisownjudgment,determined themarketvalueofacquiredlandonhigherside so as to give financial benefit to the applicants[CASE NUMBER] In all these cases his favourite advocates Mr[CASE NUMBER][ENTITY] and Mr[CASE NUMBER][ENTITY], Mr[CASE NUMBER][ENTITY][CASE NUMBER][ENTITY] [CASE NUMBER] behalf of the applicants[CASE NUMBER] He with an oblique motivehavetriedtogivespecialbenefittothem by awarding compensation on higher side though othermatterswerependingforargument[CASE NUMBER]Hehas disposed off all the above referred fresh Land ReferenceCaseshurriedlyandawardedadditional amountofcompensationwhichcomestomorethan Rs[CASE NUMBER]10 Crores and thereby he with an oblique motive have tried to give financial benefit to theapplicantsandtherebyhehasadoptedcorrupt practice and failed to maintain absolute integrity[CASE NUMBER]
The proceedings and product in the form of the impugned judgement delivered by him in all the abovegroupsappearsmorelikeacollectiveand collusiveenterpriseratherthanandadversarial proceedingsbetweenthepartiesandimpartialand dishonestadjudication[CASE NUMBER]
Thus, Mr[CASE NUMBER][ENTITY] without any materials and evidenceintentionallyandpurposelyignoringthe date of notifications u/[SECTION] of the Act, comparable evidence, settled provisions of law, in all the above LRC awarded huge amount and therebyhisconductshowsthatthesaidjudgments weregivenbyhimwithanobliquemotiveandfor aconsiderationotherthanjudicialone[CASE NUMBER]
ChargeIII It is found that the advocates Mr[CASE NUMBER][ENTITY], [CASE NUMBER] Mr[CASE NUMBER][ENTITY][CASE NUMBER][ENTITY][CASE NUMBER][ENTITY]'sfavourite advocates and they used to sit daily in his chamberandtheyweretakingteaandrefreshment withhimandtheexpenditurewasbornebythem[CASE NUMBER] The details of the calls statement, of all the three lawyers shows that he was in touch with themandhewastalkingonhismobilewiththem oftenandhehasalsokeepthickrelationswith other advocates Mr[CASE NUMBER][ENTITY], Mr[CASE NUMBER][ENTITY], Mr[CASE NUMBER][ENTITY],Mr[CASE NUMBER][ENTITY][CASE NUMBER][ENTITY][CASE NUMBER]
ChargeIV ItisfurtherfoundthatMr[CASE NUMBER][ENTITY] relations with one Mr[CASE NUMBER][ENTITY], Congress Leader, who was supplying girls to him[CASE NUMBER] He was usedtositinhischamber,foralongtimeand bothofthemweretakingteaandrefreshmentin thechamber[CASE NUMBER]HeusedtocallMs[CASE NUMBER][ENTITY] employee in his chamber, who was working under the establishment of Taluka Legal Service Committee with whom he had close personal relations[CASE NUMBER] She also used to sit in his chamber foralongtime[CASE NUMBER]
ChargeV One Mr[CASE NUMBER][ENTITY], Police Inspector, Veraval City Police Station had lodged a compliant againstMr[CASE NUMBER][ENTITY],Executive Engineer of GEB vide Veraval City [CASE NUMBER][CASE NUMBER][CASE NUMBER] under the provisions of [SECTION] of the [ACT]Thesaidcasewasregisteredas [CASE NUMBER] [CASE NUMBER][CASE NUMBER] Mr[CASE NUMBER][ENTITY] had appearedonbehalfoftheaccused[CASE NUMBER]Thepleawas recordedon06[CASE NUMBER]02[CASE NUMBER]2006[CASE NUMBER]Inthesaidcase,trial was concluded in the month of February, 2006[CASE NUMBER] After conclusion of trial though the accused remainedabsenttwice,hiswarrantwascancelled and his further statement was recorded on 28[CASE NUMBER]03[CASE NUMBER]2006 and, accused was acquitted after takingbribeofRs[CASE NUMBER]50,000/byMr[CASE NUMBER][ENTITY][CASE NUMBER]
[CASE NUMBER][CASE NUMBER][ENTITY], through his advocate Mr[CASE NUMBER][ENTITY], an application for claiming interim relief to restrain the authorities from taking possession of the quarter and to recover the market rent fromhissalarywasgiven[CASE NUMBER]Itisfoundfromthe recordthatMr[CASE NUMBER][ENTITY] intentionallyignoredthecircularanddocuments produced at Mark 16 and granted injunction as prayed for, restraining the authority from dispossessing the plaintiff and also from recoveringthemarketrent[CASE NUMBER]
In [CASE NUMBER] filed on 25/01/2005, the plaintiff had claimed interim relief to restrain the defendants from interfering with the possession of land bearing R[CASE NUMBER]S[CASE NUMBER]No[CASE NUMBER] 481 which was the subject matter of R[CASE NUMBER]C[CASE NUMBER]S[CASE NUMBER]No[CASE NUMBER]93/94,inwhichthedecreeintermsof compromise was passed earlier and also the execution proceedings was pending between the [CASE NUMBER] parties[CASE NUMBER] Till 1/08/2005, no interim relief was grantedinfavouroftheplaintiff[CASE NUMBER]Theplaintiff filed an application Exh[CASE NUMBER] 42, to withdraw the saidsuit,withpermissiontofileafreshsuit, which was strongly objected by the defendants statingreasons,eventhoughwithoutpassingany speaking order, Mr[CASE NUMBER][ENTITY] allowed the plaintiff and granted permission as prayed for[CASE NUMBER] On the very same day i[CASE NUMBER]e[CASE NUMBER] on 01/08/2005, one another CivilSuitsbearingRegularCivilSuitNo[CASE NUMBER]60/05 wasfiledbythesameplaintiff,againstthesame defendant, on the same subject matter and claiming the same interim relief[CASE NUMBER] Though the defendantsofthesesuitswereresidingatUna, 90 k[CASE NUMBER]m[CASE NUMBER] away from Veraval, he fixed the returnabledateonthirddayi[CASE NUMBER]e[CASE NUMBER]on03[CASE NUMBER]08[CASE NUMBER]2005 for service of notice which was personally servedonlyto3defendantsoutof14defendants[CASE NUMBER] He without ascertaining the proper service orderedtoproceedexparteagainstdefendantno[CASE NUMBER]2 and 4[CASE NUMBER] He also without hearing the defendants passed an order below exh[CASE NUMBER]14 and granted injunction[CASE NUMBER]
[CASE NUMBER] was filed on 01[CASE NUMBER]01[CASE NUMBER]2006 for declaration and permanent injunctionandalsoforthereliefinmandatory form and the subject matter involved was worth morethan22lacs[CASE NUMBER]TheStatehadissuednoticeof recovery of stamps worth Rs[CASE NUMBER]3,34,780/[CASE NUMBER]The AGP raised the dispute in the written statement at [CASE NUMBER] para 27 that the plaintiff had not affixed the adequatecourtfeesstampontheplaint[CASE NUMBER]However, within 7 days he has granted the application Exh[CASE NUMBER]5[CASE NUMBER]
The manner and mode in which Mr[CASE NUMBER][ENTITY] has conducted all the above referred matters shows hisobliquemotive[CASE NUMBER]
5[CASE NUMBER] The aforesaid charges are found to have been provedbytheinquiryofficerandtheconclusion recordedbytheinquiryofficerfortheaforesaid chargesreadsasunder:
ChargeNo[CASE NUMBER]1 I,therefore,decidethatCharge No[CASE NUMBER]1hasbeenprovedagainstthedelinquent[CASE NUMBER]
Charge No[CASE NUMBER]3 I, therefore, decide that PresentingOfficerhasprovedChargeNo[CASE NUMBER]3against delinquentMr[CASE NUMBER][ENTITY][CASE NUMBER]
ChargeNo[CASE NUMBER]4-Hence,inmyconsideredopinionthe Presenting Officer, in all preponderance of probabilities,hasprovedChargeNo[CASE NUMBER]4againstthe delinquent[CASE NUMBER]
Charge No[CASE NUMBER]5 Hence, in all preponderance of probabilities, I decide that the Presenting Officer has proved Charge No[CASE NUMBER]5 against the delinquent[CASE NUMBER]
6[CASE NUMBER] Asobservedearlier,chargeNo[CASE NUMBER]2andchargeNo[CASE NUMBER]6 are not proved and no reasons for disagreement [CASE NUMBER] wererecordedbyrespondentno[CASE NUMBER]2[CASE NUMBER] Wefindthat neither reproduction nor discussion may be required on the said aspect[CASE NUMBER] Our judicial scrutiny therefore would be limited to the decision taken by the High Court on administrative side for dismissal of the petitioneronthepremisethatchargenos[CASE NUMBER]1,3,4 and 5 are found to have been proved before the inquiry officer and the High Court on administrative side was satisfied for the disciplinaryactionofdismissalfromservice[CASE NUMBER]
7[CASE NUMBER] Beforeweadverttothefactualaspects,wemay refertothecaselawforthescopeofjudicial reviewunderArticle226oftheConstitutionina matter where disciplinary authority has taken decision for dismissal of service against a judicialofficer[CASE NUMBER]
8[CASE NUMBER] Wefindthatweneednotburdenthejudgmentwith various case laws, but the reference to the recentcaselawswhereinearliercaselawshave beenconsidered,maybesufficient[CASE NUMBER]
9[CASE NUMBER] The Division Bench of this Court ([ENTITY], C[CASE NUMBER]J[CASE NUMBER] (as he then was) & [ENTITY], J) in the case of [PRECEDENT], Through Secretary, LegalDepartment&Anr[CASE NUMBER]reportedin2012(1)GLR 547,whileundertakingjudicialreviewofacase ofdismissalofserviceofaLabourCourtJudge, observedatparas19to21asunder:
[CASE NUMBER] "19[CASE NUMBER] Intheprocessofjudicialreviewthe Court will not sit in appeal over the conclusions of the inquiry officer and/or the decision of disciplinary authority and would not reappreciate the evidence or interfere with the findings unless the findings are based on no evidence and are clearlyperverse[CASE NUMBER]AsheldbytheApexCourt the taste of perversity is whether the authority concerned could have reasonably arrived at the conclusion on the basis of material on record[CASE NUMBER] We posed the same question with reference to the findings of theinquiryofficerandthedecisionofthe disciplinary authority and are not able to hold that the findings can be said to be perverse or could not have been reasonably arrivedat[CASE NUMBER]
20[CASE NUMBER]Withregardtothescopeofinterference by the High Court in jurisdiction under Article226oftheConstitutiontheHon'ble ApexCourt,[PRECEDENT], that:
" ItisasettledlawthattheHigh Court has limited scope of interference in the administrative action of the State in exercise of extraordinary jurisdiction under [SECTION] of the [ACT] and, therefore, the findings recorded by the enquiry officer and theconsequentorderofpunishmentof dismissalfromserviceshouldnotbe disturbed "(emphasissupplied) Inthefactsofthecasereferencemayalso bemadetothejudgmentoftheApexCourtin case between [PRECEDENT] wherein the Apex Court hasobservedthat:
[CASE NUMBER] "17[CASE NUMBER] Once it is found that all the procedural requirements have been complied with, the courts would not ordinarilyinterferewiththequantum of punishment imposed upon a delinquent employee[CASE NUMBER] The Superior Courtsonlyinsomecasesmayinvoke the doctrine of proportionality[CASE NUMBER] If thedecisionofanemployerisfound to be within the legal parameters, thejurisdictionwouldordinarilynot beinvokedwhenthemisconductstands proved[CASE NUMBER](emphasissupplied) 17[CASE NUMBER]1TheHighCourtinexerciseofits jurisdiction under [SECTION] of the [ACT] also cannot, on the basis of sympathy or sentiment, overturnalegalorder[CASE NUMBER]"
TheHon'bleApexCourt,withregardtothe factualfindingsoftheinquiryofficerand disciplinaryauthorityhas,incasebetween [PRECEDENT], held that: "ThisCourthasrepeatedlyheldthat the factual finding of the disciplinary authority after holding a detailed enquiry and after going through elaborate evidence is not assailable in the courts unless the breach of principles of natural justiceortheviolationofany rules or any material irregularity on the faceofrecordisallegedandshown[CASE NUMBER] However,inthiscasethe HighCourt inthejurisdictionunderArticle226 of the [ACT] has again gone into all aspects of the enquiryindetailandhascometothe same factual finding as the disciplinary authority and the Appellate Authority[CASE NUMBER] Such concurrent [CASE NUMBER] findings by three different authoritiesincludingtheHighCourt shouldnotbedisturbedbythisCourt underArticle136ofthe[ACT][CASE NUMBER] We, therefore, have no other option except to dismiss this appeal[CASE NUMBER] Accordingly, the appeal standsdismissed[CASE NUMBER]"
We are not sitting in appeal over the findings and the decision of the inquiry officeranditisnotwithinthepurviewof judicial review to examine the sufficiency of evidence except lack or absence of evidenceortodecideabouttheproprietyof inquiry officer's decision to believe one pieceofevidenceoveranother[CASE NUMBER]
TheApexCourtagainemphasizedtherestrain tobeexercisedintheexerciseofpowerof judicialreview,particularlyinthematters related to Departmental Proceedings and imposition of punishment[CASE NUMBER] In 2009, in the decision the case between [PRECEDENT] and anothervs[CASE NUMBER][ENTITY] [2009(15)SCC620]theApexCourtobserved inpara13ofthedecisionthat: "13[CASE NUMBER] It has been time and again said thatitisnotopentotheHighCourt toexaminethefindingsrecordedbythe inquiry officer as a Court of appeal andreachitsownconclusionsandthat power of judicial review is not directed against the decision but is confined to the decision - making process[CASE NUMBER] Inacasesuchasthepresent one where the delinquent admitted the charges, no scope is left to differ withtheconclusionsarrivedatbythe inquiry officer about the proof of charges[CASE NUMBER] In the absence of any procedural illegality or irregularity in conduct of the department enquiry, it has to be held that the charges [CASE NUMBER] againstthedelinquentstoodprovedand warrantednoinferences[CASE NUMBER]"
21[CASE NUMBER] At this stage, we consider it appropriatetorefertothelawdeclaredby the Hon'ble Apex Court, on this point, in the judgment between High Court of Judicature, Bombay v/s Shashikant S[CASE NUMBER] Patil (AIR 2000 SC 22) wherein the Hon'ble Apex Courthasobservedinpara16that: "16 But we cannot overlook that the departmental authority (in this case theDisciplinary Committee of the High Court) is the sole judge of the facts,iftheinquiryhasbeenproperly conducted[CASE NUMBER] The settled legal position isthatifthereissomelegalevidence on which the findings can be based, then adequacy or even reliability of that evidence is not a matter for canvassing before the High Court in a writ petition filed under [SECTION] oftheConstitution[CASE NUMBER]
(Emphasissupplied)
10[CASE NUMBER] A useful reference can also be made to the decisionoftheApexCourtinthecaseofNirmala [PRECEDENT] for the scope of judicial review[CASE NUMBER] In the said decision, at paras 22, 23 and24theApexCourtobservedthus III[CASE NUMBER]ScopeofJudicialReview:
22[CASE NUMBER] It is settled legal proposition that judicialreviewisnotakintoadjudication onmeritbyreappreciatingtheevidenceas an Appellate Authority[CASE NUMBER] The only considerationtheCourt/Tribunalhasinits judicialreview,istoconsider whetherthe conclusion is based on evidence on record and supports the finding or whether the [CASE NUMBER] conclusion is based on no evidence[CASE NUMBER] The adequacy or reliability of the evidence is not a matter which can be permitted to be canvassed before the Court in writ [PRECEDENT][PRECEDENT], and Government of A[CASE NUMBER]P[CASE NUMBER] & Ors[CASE NUMBER] v[CASE NUMBER] Mohd[CASE NUMBER]
NasrullahKhan,AIR2006SC1214)
23[CASE NUMBER] In [PRECEDENT][CASE NUMBER], thisCourt whiledealingwiththeissueof scopeofjudicialreview,heldasunder:
"10 Theprinciplethatifsomeofthe reasonsreliedonbyaTribunalforits conclusionturnouttobeextraneousor otherwise unsustainable, its decision wouldbevitiated,appliestocasesin whichtheconclusionisarrivedatnot on assessment of objective facts or evidence, but on subjective satisfaction[CASE NUMBER] The reason is that whereasincaseswherethedecisionis based on subjective satisfaction if some of the reasons turn out to be irrelevant or invalid, it would be impossibleforasuperiorCourttofind out which of the reasons, relevant or irrelevant, valid or invalid, had broughtaboutsuchsatisfaction[CASE NUMBER]Butin acasewheretheconclusionisbasedon objective facts and evidence, such a difficulty would not arise[CASE NUMBER] If it is found that there was legal evidence beforetheTribunal,evenifsomeofit was irrelevant, asuperiorCourtwould not interfere if the finding can be sustainedontherestoftheevidence[CASE NUMBER] The reason is that in a writ petition for certiorarithe superior Court does not sit in appeal, but exercises only supervisory jurisdiction, and therefore, does not enter into the questionofsufficiencyofevidence[CASE NUMBER]
(Emphasisadded) [CASE NUMBER]
24[CASE NUMBER] The decisions referred to hereinabove highlights clearly, the parameter of the Court's power of judicial review of administrativeactionordecision[CASE NUMBER] Anorder can be setaside if it is based on extraneous grounds, or when there are no grounds at all for passing it or when the groundsaresuchthat,noonecanreasonably arrive at the opinion[CASE NUMBER] The Court does not sit as a Court of Appeal but, it merely reviewsthemannerinwhichthedecisionwas made[CASE NUMBER] The Court will not normally exercise its power of judicial review unless it is found that formation of belief by the statutory authority suffers from malafides, dishonest/corrupt practice[CASE NUMBER] In other words, the authority must act in good faith[CASE NUMBER] Neitherthequestionastowhethertherewas sufficientevidencebeforetheauthoritycan beraised/examined,northequestionofre appreciating the evidence to examine the correctnessoftheorderunderchallenge[CASE NUMBER]If therearesufficientgroundsforpassingan order,thenevenifoneofthemisfoundto be correct, and on its basis the order impugnedcanbepassed,thereisnooccasion fortheCourttointerfere[CASE NUMBER]Thejurisdiction is circumscribed and confined to correct errorsoflawor proceduralerror, ifany, resultinginmanifestmiscarriageofjustice or violation of principles of natural justice[CASE NUMBER] This apart, even when some defect is found in the decision making process, the Court must exercise its discretionary powerwithgreat cautionkeepinginmindthe larger public interest and only when it comes to the conclusion that overwhelming public interest requires interference, the Courtshouldintervene[CASE NUMBER]"
(Emphasissupplied) The aforesaid shows that the order can be set asideifitisbasedonextraneousgroundorwhen there are no grounds at all for passing such [CASE NUMBER] order or the grounds are such that no one can reasonably arrive at the opinion[CASE NUMBER] The Court wouldnotsitinappeal,butwouldmerelyreview themannerinwhichthedecisionwasmade[CASE NUMBER] The Court will not normally exercise its power for judicial review unless it is found that the formation of belief by the statutory authority suffers from malafides, dishonest/corrupt practice[CASE NUMBER]Inotherwords,theauthoritymustact ingoodfaith[CASE NUMBER]Neitherthequestionastowhether there was sufficient evidence before the authority can be raised/examined, nor the question of reappreciation of the evidence to examine the correctness of the order under challenge[CASE NUMBER] If there are sufficient grounds for passinganorder,evenifoneofthemisfoundto becorrect,andonitsbasistheorder impugned ispassed,thereisnooccasionfortheCourtto interfere[CASE NUMBER]Thejurisdictioniscircumscribedand confined to correct the errors of law or proceduralerror,ifany,resultingintomanifest miscarriageofjusticeorviolationofprinciples ofnaturaljustice[CASE NUMBER] Whileexercisingpower,the Courtmustexerciseitsdiscretionarypowerwith greatcautionkeepinginmindthelargerpublic interestandonlywhenitcomestotheconclusion that overwhelming public interest requires interference, then only the Court should intervene[CASE NUMBER]
Intheverydecision,forthestandardofproof inadepartmentalinquiry,afterconsideringthe [CASE NUMBER] variousearlierdecisionsoftheApexCourt,it wassummarisedatparagraph17asunder:
"Inviewoftheabove,thelawontheissue can be summarised to the effect that the disciplinaryproceedingsarenotacriminal trial, and in spite of the fact that the samearequasijudicialandquasicriminal, doctrine of proof beyond reasonable doubt, does not apply in such cases, but the principle of preponderance of probabilities would apply[CASE NUMBER] The court has to see whether there is evidence on record to reach the conclusionthatthedelinquenthadcommitted a misconduct[CASE NUMBER] However, the said conclusion should be reached on the basis of test of [ENTITY][CASE NUMBER]The ratioofthejudgmentinPrahladSaranGupta (supra)doesnotapplyinthiscaseasthe said case was of professional misconduct, andnotofadelinquencybytheemployee[CASE NUMBER]"
(Emphasissupplied)
11[CASE NUMBER] The aforesaid shows that in a disciplinary proceeding, the doctrine of proof beyond reasonable doubt has no applicability but the principles of preponderance of probabilities wouldapply[CASE NUMBER] Thecourtwouldseeastowhether thereisevidenceonrecordtoreachconclusion thatthedelinquenthadcommittedmisconduct[CASE NUMBER]But the said conclusion should be reached on the basisoftestofwhataprudentpersonwouldhave done[CASE NUMBER]
12[CASE NUMBER] Itisinlightoftheaforesaidlegalposition, wemaynowconsiderthecontentionsraisedbythe learned counsel appearing for both the sides takingintoconsiderationthefactualaspects[CASE NUMBER]
[CASE NUMBER]
13[CASE NUMBER] Mr[CASE NUMBER][ENTITY], learned counsel appearing for the petitioner raised the first contention that all the charges which are found to be proved are without their being any sufficient evidence and as per him, it was a case of no evidence[CASE NUMBER] He alternatively submitted that no reasonable man withprudenceonthebasisoftheevidencewould findthatthechargesareproved[CASE NUMBER]Infurtherance to his submission, he contended that the first chargerelatestotakinguplandreferencecases whereincertainadvocateswereappearingandthe allegation was that they were in close contact with the delinquent[CASE NUMBER] He submitted that the delinquent in capacity as Chairman of Taluka Legal Aid Committee had to call Mr[CASE NUMBER][ENTITY] who was Vice President of the bar and with other advocates[CASE NUMBER] He submitted that unless there was cooperationbytheadvocates,thelegalaidwork cannot be effectively undertaken[CASE NUMBER] It was contendedthatiflawyersarecalledinchamber of judicial officer for the purpose of participation in the legal aid activity or for extending of cooperation in legal aid work, it cannot be said that they were having close relation with the judicial officer and that if thelearnedJudgehasdecidedtheirmatters,it wasbywayoffavouritismorwithanyextraneous consideration[CASE NUMBER] Mr[CASE NUMBER][ENTITY] further submitted that against the decision on judicial side by the delinquent, the appeals were preferred by the State but those appeals are dismissed and only [CASE NUMBER] three appeals are pending, out of which as per hisinformation,twoappealsarenowdecidedand onlyoneappealispending[CASE NUMBER]Hesubmittedthatif judicial orders are not interfered with by the HighCourtonjudicialside,theinquiryofficer couldnotsitinappealoverthesaiddecisionof theHighCourtandtakeviewthatthedecisions were given by the delinquent contrary to the otherSupremeCourtdecisions[CASE NUMBER]Hesubmittedthat in a case where any judicial officer has exercised power on judicial side and the allegationismadethatpowerisexercisedbyway offavouritismorwithextraneousconsideration, muchhigherdegreeofproofisrequired,whichis lacking in the present case and therefore, he submitted that the findings recorded by the inquiry officer or that the disciplinary authorityconcurringwiththesaidfindingwould not meet with the test of reasonable prudence[CASE NUMBER] He also submitted that the advocates who were connected with the case forming part of allegation have not been examined and the evidence of witnesses are only hearsay on the basis of gossips which cannot be said to be a substituteofalegalproof[CASE NUMBER] Hesubmittedthat only four advocates were examined who were not appearingasadvocateinanyoftheproceedings[CASE NUMBER] Further, out of those four advocates, two were relativesofoneanother[CASE NUMBER]Noneoftheadvocates were office bearers of the bar association and one was not even in practice[CASE NUMBER] As per him, no [CASE NUMBER] advocateoftheGovernmentwhowasappearingin the matters were examined[CASE NUMBER] He submitted that even lady staff who was stated to have been harassedwasnotexaminednoranycomplaintwas made by any lady staff against the delinquent[CASE NUMBER] In his submission, the relevant evidences have been ignored by the inquiry officer and therefore, the finding recorded by him is perverse to the evidence on record[CASE NUMBER] Mr[CASE NUMBER] [ENTITY], learned counsel also submitted that rojkam and other court proceedings which have been considered by the inquiry officer were not suppliedtothedelinquentnortheywereproduced duringthecourseoftheinquiryandtherefore, thereisbreachofprinciplesofnaturaljustice inrespectofallcharges[CASE NUMBER]
14[CASE NUMBER] Whereas, Mr[CASE NUMBER][ENTITY], learned counsel appearingforrespondentno[CASE NUMBER]2contendedthatfour advocates who had shown courage to expose the misconductofasittingjudgecanbeconsidered aswhistleblowersthoughthebarmayhavenumber oflawyers[CASE NUMBER]Buteverybodymaynotcomeforward forgivingevidence[CASE NUMBER]Inhissubmission,thetest is whether by cogent and reliable material the accusationorthechargeisprovedornot[CASE NUMBER] The evidence of the advocates is not based on any gossiporhearsay,butonthecontrary,theyhave deposedbeforetheinquiryofficerthattheyhad seen the aforesaid advocates and one Mr[CASE NUMBER][ENTITY] the delinquent and they were sitting for long [CASE NUMBER] time taking breakfast and cigarettes that too duringcourthoursresultingthelawyerswaitin the court or outside the chamber if they were desirous to see the judicial officer for court work[CASE NUMBER] He submitted that the evidence has also comeonrecordthatthosethreeadvocatesusedto pay for the breakfast and cigarettes of the delinquent[CASE NUMBER] Not only that, but for the lady clerk, the evidence is direct inasmuch as Mr[CASE NUMBER] [ENTITY] and other advocates who were examined haveseentheladyclerksittinginthechamber ofthelearnedJudgeforalongtimeandsharing breakfast and the door used to be closed[CASE NUMBER] He submittedthataspertheevidenceofMr[CASE NUMBER][ENTITY]advocate,hehadseenthatwhen the lady clerk was sitting on the dais, the judicialofficerwouldusetoteaseherleg[CASE NUMBER]In thesubmissionofMr[CASE NUMBER][ENTITY],nocontradictionhas come out in the cross examination nor the said part is contradicted by way of denial by the delinquent officer[CASE NUMBER] He submitted that if the testistoapplyofreasonableprudence,itcan besaidthatanyreasonablemanwouldcometothe conclusion that the decision in land reference cases and other cases are to favour those advocates by extraneous consideration[CASE NUMBER] He submittedthatitispossiblethatthepartyor theGovernmentforvariousreasonsmightnothave preferredappealagainstthedecision[CASE NUMBER] Butsuch wouldnotbethetest[CASE NUMBER]Hefurthersubmittedthat the appeals which are stated to have been [CASE NUMBER] dismissed, are in majority of the cases on accountofthefactthattheamountinvolvedin theappealwaslessthanRs[CASE NUMBER]1Lakh[CASE NUMBER]Butthereby, it cannot be said that the High Court has confirmedtheorderpassedbythedelinquenton judicial side[CASE NUMBER] In the submission of Mr[CASE NUMBER][ENTITY], one has also to apply the doctrine of preponderance of probabilities since the allegationandaccusationwerelikethatandit wasnotacasewhereatrapwasconductedandthe judicial officer was found taking money on the spot[CASE NUMBER]Inhissubmission,theevidenceonrecord was sufficient to draw the conclusion that the chargewasproved[CASE NUMBER]
15[CASE NUMBER] Ontheaspectofbreachofprinciplesofnatural justice, Mr[CASE NUMBER][ENTITY] submitted that after the chargesheet was served, since there was reference to the court proceeding and the accusationwasthatthemattersweretakenupout of turn to favour certain advocates, the delinquent had taken detailed inspection of complete record of all matters[CASE NUMBER] Not only that but he insisted to supply copies of the documents,whichwerealsosuppliedtohimafter taking inspection and he had all materials available with him and therefore, it cannot be saidthattherewasanybreachofprinciplesof natural justice[CASE NUMBER] Mr[CASE NUMBER][ENTITY] submitted that sufficiencyofthematerialwouldnotbelooked intobythisCourtwhileundertakingthejudicial reviewofanactioninadepartmentalproceeding[CASE NUMBER]
[CASE NUMBER] Inhissubmission,therewassufficientmaterial andtheinquiryofficerhas,basedonthesame, recorded the conclusion[CASE NUMBER] The High Court on administrative side has further considered the inquiryofficer'sreportandfoundthecasefor dismissal[CASE NUMBER] In his submission, the decision by theHighcourtonadministrativesidewouldnot call for any interference while undertaking the judicial review since in the present case, all testsarefullysatisfiedfortakingdecisionof dismissalfromservice[CASE NUMBER]
16[CASE NUMBER] Wemayfirstdealwiththecontentionofalleged breachofprinciplesofnaturaljustice[CASE NUMBER] Itis true that in the list of documents supplied to the delinquent, the copies of the judgment and orderspassedareonlyreferredtoandnotrojkam oranyproceedingsofthosecases[CASE NUMBER]However,after the chargesheet was served, the delinquent has takeninspectionofalltherecordandnotonly that,butafterinspection,hedemandedforthe copy of certain documents which he found it appropriate for submitting the statement of defence[CASE NUMBER] Such were supplied as desired by the delinquent[CASE NUMBER] Mr[CASE NUMBER][ENTITY],learnedcounselappearing for respondent no[CASE NUMBER]2 during the course of the hearinghastenderedauthenticatedrecordshowing the inspection taken and the documents supplied tothedelinquentofficer[CASE NUMBER] Thesaidaspecthas not been disputed on behalf of the petitioner that the inspection was not taken or that the desired documents as demanded by the delinquent [CASE NUMBER] were not supplied[CASE NUMBER] Therefore, if the inspectionofcompeterecordofallthosecases which were part of the charge was permitted to the delinquent officer coupled with the aspect thataftertheinspection,whateverthedocuments weredemandedbythedelinquentofficerwerealso suppliedtohimandthereafter,hesubmittedthe statementofdefence[CASE NUMBER] Hence,itcannotbesaid that there was any breach of principles of natural justice as sought to be canvassed[CASE NUMBER] On thecontentionthatsuchrojkamoftherespective casesortheproceedingswerenotformingpartof theevidenceledbeforetheinquiryofficer,we findthatthechargecontainedtheallegationof taking up of the land references cases out of turnandwheninspectionofcompleterecordwas permitted and the relevant documents were also suppliedtothedelinquentofficer,thosematters cannot be said to be extraneous or beyond the scopeofdepartmentalinquirynoritcanbesaid thathisdefencewasprejudicedsinceopportunity was available to the delinquent officer to contradict the witnesses who deposed before the inquiryofficerthatcertainlandreferencecases formingpartofthechargeandothercaseswere decided with extraneous consideration[CASE NUMBER] Apart from the above, when a complaint is brought before the Court for the alleged breach of principles of natural justice, court may not entertain such complaint if prejudice is satisfactorilynotdemonstratedbeforetheCourt [CASE NUMBER] by the complaining party[CASE NUMBER] If the Court is satisfied that no prejudice is caused to the complainingparty,Courtmaydeclinetoentertain thecomplaintforallegedbreachofprinciplesof natural justice[CASE NUMBER] Under the circumstances, we find that the contention for alleged breach of principlesofnaturaljusticecannotbeaccepted[CASE NUMBER] Hence,thesaidcontentionfails[CASE NUMBER]
17[CASE NUMBER] AnattemptwasmadebyMr[CASE NUMBER][ENTITY],learnedCounsel for the petitioner to rely upon certain observations of the Apex Court in the case Ms[CASE NUMBER] [ENTITY], and more particularly discussion under the head of "punishment" in corruption casesandhecontendedthatifthesameyardstick isapplied,itwasacaseofnoevidence[CASE NUMBER]
18[CASE NUMBER] Inourview,thesaidcontentionisillfounded inasmuchasinPara - 51 of thesaid decision, the Apex Court did record that either the preliminary inquiry report or the statement recorded therein by the complainant, accused or [ENTITY],Advocate,werenotexhibitedin the regular inquiry and, therefore, the Court observed that in absence of information in the chargesheet that the statement would be relied upon against the appellant therein, it was not permissiblefortheInquiryofficerortheHigh Court to rely upon the same and the Apex Court found that there was breach of principle of naturaljustice[CASE NUMBER]Sucharenotthefactsituation inthepresentcase,inasmuchas,thestatements [CASE NUMBER] werepartofinquiry,thestatementsrecordedin the preliminary inquiry were relied upon during the inquiry and the witnesses whose statements wererecordedinthepreliminaryinquiryadmitted the contents of the statements and such statements were exhibited during the course of inquiry and the delinquent was given full opportunity to crossexamine the witnesses who deposed in the examination in chief as well as whosestatementswererecorded,butinthecross examination if the statement made in the examination in chief and/or the statement recorded in the preliminary inquiry were not contradicted[CASE NUMBER] Under the circumstances, if the evidence is considered by the Inquiry officer whileconsideringthematerialinsupportofthe charge, it cannot be said that there is any breachofprinciplesofnaturaljusticenorcan it be said that such statements could not have been considered in the inquiry[CASE NUMBER] Hence, the contentioncannotbeaccepted[CASE NUMBER]
19[CASE NUMBER] We may now advert to some of the important evidenceledduringtheinquiryinsupportofthe respectivecharges[CASE NUMBER]
A) Concerning to charge no[CASE NUMBER]1, Mr[CASE NUMBER][ENTITY]advocate,inhisevidence, hascategoricallystatedthatadvocateShri [ENTITY], Shri [ENTITY], Shri [ENTITY], Shri [ENTITY] and Shri [ENTITY] had thick relation with the [CASE NUMBER] delinquentandhehasalsodeposedthatthe contents of the statement recorded by the vigilance officer are true and correct and hisstatementhasbeenexhibited,beingpart oftheevidenceatExh[CASE NUMBER]39[CASE NUMBER]Inthestatement given before the vigilance officer, he had stated that the delinquent had personal relationwithoneShriHaresh[ENTITY]whowas acongressleaderandsaidMr[CASE NUMBER][ENTITY] sitinthechamberforalongtimewhichwas known to all lawyers and the Court staff[CASE NUMBER] Hefurtherstatedthatladystaffwascalled inthechamberandwaskeptforalongtime in closed door and same was also known to alllawyersand staff[CASE NUMBER] Hestatedthatthe ladywasaskedtositondaisafterrecess and at that time, it was visible that her leg was being teased[CASE NUMBER] He stated that advocate Shri [ENTITY], Shri [ENTITY] and Shri [ENTITY] used to come from Junagadh for conducting cases and their cases were immediatelydisposedofandseverallawyers knew that in land reference cases, percentages were fixed for passing order[CASE NUMBER] Healsosubmittedthatinthechamberofthe delinquent,forthewholeday,threelawyers Shri [ENTITY], [ENTITY] and [ENTITY] used to sit and the matters were being managed and it wasknowntoeverybody[CASE NUMBER]Healsostatedthat thedelinquenthadthehabitofusingcostly branded cigarettes and everyday he used to [CASE NUMBER] complete3packetsandheusedtomakeuse ofthecarsofcertainfavoritelawyersand he was not using his own car[CASE NUMBER] In his deposition,hefurtherstatedthatwhenShri Haresh[ENTITY]wassittinginthechamberof the delinquent for two hours, Court could notbestartedandalllawyershadtowait in the court room[CASE NUMBER] He had stated that though number of old land reference cases werepending,thedelinquentusedtoconduct the cases of only certain advocates for which the bribe was given[CASE NUMBER] Their were large number of other allegations for passing orders by the delinquent on extraneouscircumstances[CASE NUMBER]Hedeposedbefore theinquiryofficerthatthedelinquentused tocompelladystafftositinthechamber for hours and door was being closed from insideandhehadseentheimproperbehavior with the lady staff and it was known to other lawyers also[CASE NUMBER] In the cross examination, he has maintained that he has seen Shri [ENTITY] visiting during court hours to the delinquent[CASE NUMBER] The delinquentofficerwasnevercomingondais atabout11[CASE NUMBER]00,butheusedtoworkfrom12 to 1[CASE NUMBER]30[CASE NUMBER] In the crossexamination, he had admitted that he had heard that in land references cases corruption was going on[CASE NUMBER] Inthecrossexamination,hestatedthatin the case of Shri [ENTITY], the [CASE NUMBER] casewasconductedbythedelinquentinhis chamber and he had knowledge about it and thelawyerofaccused[ENTITY]wasalso present[CASE NUMBER]Thepertinentaspectisthatthere was no contradiction to the illtreatment giventotheladystaff[CASE NUMBER]Hemaintainedthat inhisstatement,whichwasrecorded,itwas statedbyhimthattheladystaffwasbeing illtreatedandteased[CASE NUMBER]
B) [ENTITY], who was examined at Exh[CASE NUMBER]45 hasalsostatedthatinthechamberofthe delinquent, three advocates Shri [ENTITY], [ENTITY] and [ENTITY] used to sit for a long time and he also submitted the evidence against one lady clerk [ENTITY][CASE NUMBER] He also admitted that the contents of the statementrecordedwascorrectandsamewas exhibitedatExh[CASE NUMBER]46[CASE NUMBER]Inthesaidstatement, itwasrecordedthatthedelinquentwasnot passinganyorderwithouttakingmoney[CASE NUMBER] It was also stated in the said statement that he was knowing [ENTITY] who was congressStatePresidentandwhousedtosit in the chamber of the delinquent for long time and everybody was knowing about it[CASE NUMBER] For land reference cases, he stated that after taking percentage, the orders were beingpassed[CASE NUMBER]
C) [ENTITY]anotherlawyer at Exh[CASE NUMBER]70 deposed that he had received [CASE NUMBER] complaint from the lawyers that the delinquent used to favour certain lawyers[CASE NUMBER] [ENTITY] delinquent officer with advocate [ENTITY] that the complaint filed by [ENTITY] be withdrawn otherwise he would be put into difficulty[CASE NUMBER] He has confessed the statementgivenbeforethevigilanceofficer and the said statement was exhibited at Exh[CASE NUMBER]71[CASE NUMBER] In the said statement, he has stated that he was Secretary of Bar Associationforabout16yearsandtwotimes he was President of Bar Association and he had stated that so many complaints were being received against the delinquent from thelawyersandthecomplaintcontainedthat aftergettingdesiredamount,thecaseswere beingdecidedbythedelinquentofficer[CASE NUMBER]
D) Another advocate Shri [ENTITY] CourtatVeravalwasexaminedatExh[CASE NUMBER]72and hehaddeposedthathehadseenShri[ENTITY] going to the chamber of the delinquentofficersomanytimesandhealso referred to advocate Shri [ENTITY], Shri [ENTITY] and another advocates going to the chamber of the delinquent as stated in the statement[CASE NUMBER] He has admitted that his statement was recorded by the vigilance officerandthesaidstatementwastakenin evidence at Exh[CASE NUMBER]73[CASE NUMBER] In his statement, he [CASE NUMBER] has stated that the general impression of the delinquent was that without taking money,hewasnotpassinganyorder[CASE NUMBER] Even for lady clerk [ENTITY], he has stated thatshewasaskedtositinthechamberin closed door by the delinquent for a long time and there was hue and cry that the orderwaspassedbythedelinquentinfavour of gamblers den by taking money[CASE NUMBER] He [ENTITY],[ENTITY], Shri [ENTITY] and Shri [ENTITY] were sitting in thechamberofthedelinquentofficerfora long time and same was known to everybody[CASE NUMBER] In the crossexamination of the said witness, except that in two cases, the decision was given against him, no other contradictionhascomeout[CASE NUMBER]
E) The evidence of the aforesaid lawyers for sittingwithHarish[ENTITY]forlongtimein his chamber and for sitting with the aforesaid lawyers for a long time in the chamber and also for sharing breakfast, offering cigarettes and payment of the amount by the lawyer is supported by the evidenceofCourtstaffShriAshishKalaiya Peon, Exh[CASE NUMBER]89, [ENTITY], Peon, Exh[CASE NUMBER]91, Mr[CASE NUMBER][ENTITY],Exh[CASE NUMBER]93[CASE NUMBER]Theaspectofcalling lady Clerk [ENTITY] in the chamber for longtimerepeatedlyandthatladyclerkwas asked to sit in the chamber for long time anddoorremainedclosedduringthatperiod [CASE NUMBER] is also supported by the evidence of the aforesaid court staffs[CASE NUMBER] The evidence of Gujarati Stenographers Shri [ENTITY], Exh[CASE NUMBER]95, Shri [ENTITY], Exh[CASE NUMBER]97, Shri [ENTITY], Exh[CASE NUMBER]99 and Shri [ENTITY], Exh[CASE NUMBER]101showsthatthedelinquentofficerso manytimes,usedtopreparethejudgmentin his own handwriting and was giving the stenographer for typing and so many times, thejudgmentswerebeingpreparedbyfilling up of the gaps in handwriting of the delinquentofficerandtheywerebeinggiven fortypingtothestenographer[CASE NUMBER]
F) The contents of the charges are to be examinedinlightoftheaforesaidevidence thatthelandreferencecasesandthecases of only certain lawyers who used to regularlysitinthechamberofthelearned Judgeforlongtimeandwhousedtocomeand visit the chamber of the learned judge frequently, were taken up and the orders were passed by the delinquent officer in their favour by awarding compensation[CASE NUMBER] One of the allegation was that large number of othermatterswerependingoflandreference cases including old matters, but only the matters of those advocates were taken up thattoobypreponingofthedatesfixedand was decided just prior to the period of regulartransferduringwhichhewasduefor transfer[CASE NUMBER]
[CASE NUMBER],itcannot be said that charge No[CASE NUMBER]1 was found to be proved by the Inquiry Officer erroneously withouttherebeinganymaterialonrecord[CASE NUMBER] Be it recorded that, sufficiency of the materialisoutsidethejudicialreview,but this Court may be required to see as to whether the conclusion recorded by the Inquiry Officer was based on material and legalevidenceornot[CASE NUMBER]
Theattemptmadebythelearnedcounselfor thepetitionertocontendthattheadvocates who were appearing in the matter were not examinedoranyGovernmentAdvocatewasnot examined,inourviewcannotbecountenanced forthesimplereasonthattheadvocatewho has been favoured is not going to come forward for giving evidence[CASE NUMBER] So far as the Government Advocate is concerned, the Government may have various reasons to accept the decision or the Government Advocate may not come forward to give the evidence[CASE NUMBER] We are not impressed by the submission that merely because the GovernmentAdvocatewasnotexaminedduring the course of the inquiry, the other legal evidenceofotherAdvocatedulycorroborated by the evidence of court staff should not have been relied upon by the Inquiry Officer[CASE NUMBER]
[CASE NUMBER] AttemptmadebythelearnedCounselforthe petitioner to contend that majority of the Appealsagainstthesaidjudgmentshavebeen dismissed by this Court and, therefore, InquiryOfficercouldnothavesatinAppeal or could not have recorded the findings contrarytothedecisionofthisCourt,also cannotbecountenancedfortworeasons,viz[CASE NUMBER] oneisthatinmajorityoftheAppeals,such Appeals are dismissed on account of smallnessoftheamountandthedecisionsof this Court are not on merits[CASE NUMBER] It is true thatintwocases,Appealsaredecidedalso onmerit,buttherebyitcannotbesaidthat the misconduct already committed by the delinquent would automatically get nullified[CASE NUMBER] It is true that the aggrieved partymaymakeacomplaintifanyfavourtism is shown by any Judicial Officer or the judicial powers are exercised with extraneous consideration,butthesamecan be one of the sources for getting the complaint for misconduct[CASE NUMBER] If in a given circumstance the complaint is not filed by thepartytotheproceeding,butisfiledby anyotherpartywhohadknowledgeaboutthe misconductcommittedbytheJudicialOfficer and the substance is found in such allegation,thesamewouldnotgetnullified merely because the party to the proceeding has not complained against the Judicial [CASE NUMBER] Officer or on judicial side before the higher forum the order is not interfered with[CASE NUMBER] In any case, if one has to apply reasonable prudence, in the circumstance that a Judicial Officer continuously maintains close relations with certain Advocates, that too, to the extent of sitting in Chamber during the courts hours for a long time and shares the breakfast and cigarettes with the Advocates and the paymentisbeingmadebythoseAdvocatesand when he functions on judicial side the mattersofthoseAdvocatesaretakenupout of turn and huge awards are passed, would showthatthedecisionsarewithextraneous consideration other than the judicial one[CASE NUMBER] Iftheobliquemotiveandtheconsideration is other than judicial one for giving the judgment or the award in case by any judicialofficer,[ENTITY] committed grave misconduct in discharge of hisjudicialduty[CASE NUMBER]
G) In respect of charge No[CASE NUMBER]3, same situation wouldariseasthatofchargeNo[CASE NUMBER]1inasmuch as, the matters were decided of Shri [ENTITY] and Shri [ENTITY] and the injunction was granted by exercising judicial power on consideration other than judicial one[CASE NUMBER] There is sufficient material for proof of charge No[CASE NUMBER]3, inasmuch as, the aforesaidAdvocates[ENTITY],Shri[ENTITY] [CASE NUMBER] and Shri [ENTITY], used to sit daily in the chamber of the delinquent officer and they weretakingteaandrefreshment[CASE NUMBER]Ithasalso come through the evidence of Court staff that the expenses were borne by the Advocates[CASE NUMBER]TheCourtstaffwhowereexamined aswitnesseshavesupportedtheevidenceof the Advocates who were examined as witnesses[CASE NUMBER]
Mr[CASE NUMBER][ENTITY],learnedCounselappearingforthe petitioner,madeanattempttocontendthat mobile data were not produced and, therefore, the charge could not be said to be proved which, in our view, cannot be countenancedforthesimplereasonthatwhen direct evidence of the Advocates who have seen the aforesaid three Advocates Shri [ENTITY], Shri [ENTITY] and Shri [ENTITY] frequently sitting in the chamber of the delinquentofficer,havedeposedbeforethe Inquiry officer and in the cross examination, the said aspect is not materially contradicted and further the Court staff who are examined as witnesses have supported the said accusation, merely becausethemobiledatawerenotproducedit cannot be said that the charge No[CASE NUMBER]3 was found to be proved without there being any sufficient material before the Inquiry officer[CASE NUMBER] The fact that frequently the expenses for breakfast and the cigarettes [CASE NUMBER] were being borne by the aforesaid three Advocateswouldshowthatwhilemaintaining the relations the delinquent officer also acceptedmonetaryfavoursfromtheAdvocate for payment of breakfast and cigarettes, that too, during the court hours while on duty[CASE NUMBER]
H) In respect of the evidence of charge No[CASE NUMBER]4, it has been proved by the evidence of the witnesses that one Shri [ENTITY], Congress leader was in close relation with thedelinquent[CASE NUMBER]Thereissufficientevidence toshowthatsaidShriHaresh[ENTITY] sitinthechamberofthedelinquentfora longtimeandtheyweretakingteaandthe refreshmentinthechamber[CASE NUMBER]Theevidenceof the Advocate further shows that on account of the same, the Advocates had to wait in theCourtforavailabilityofthedelinquent as Presiding Officer and they had also to wait outside the chamber for any judicial work[CASE NUMBER] There is sufficient evidence to show that the delinquent used to call Ms[CASE NUMBER] [ENTITY], a lady employee, in his chamber and theallegationisthathehadclosepersonal relationandsheusedtositinthechamber foralongtime[CASE NUMBER]Suchaspecthasbeenproved by the evidence of aforesaid Advocates who wereexaminedaswitnessesandcorroborated bytheevidenceofcourtstaff[CASE NUMBER]Therelevant aspect is that as per the evidence of [CASE NUMBER] witnessesthatthedoorremainedclosedwhen Ms[CASE NUMBER]Nita[ENTITY]wasinsidethechamberofthe delinquent and one of the advocates has deposed to the extent that the lock was being applied to the chamber[CASE NUMBER] The advocate Mr[CASE NUMBER][ENTITY], inhisevidencestatedthat whenthesaid ladywassittingondais,he hadseenthedelinquentteasingherlegwith hisleg[CASE NUMBER]Theaforesaidevidencehasnotbeen contradictedinthecrossexaminationofthe said witness[CASE NUMBER] The fact of Ms[CASE NUMBER] [ENTITY] being called in the chamber frequently and sitting for a long time and sharing break fastisalsocorroboratedbytheevidenceof courtstaffwhowereexaminedaswitnesses[CASE NUMBER] Inourview,iftheInquiryOfficerhascome to a conclusion that the charge No[CASE NUMBER]4 is proved, such could not be said as without anyevidence[CASE NUMBER]Ithasnotcomeonrecordthat Shri [ENTITY] was supplying the girls to the delinquent,butinourviewthesaidaspect, at the most, can be considered as lacking prooftothatextent[CASE NUMBER]Butthereby,itcannot be said that other accusations made in chargeNo[CASE NUMBER]4werefoundtobeprovedwithout any sufficient material[CASE NUMBER] In our view, even if such aspect of supplying the girl is excluded,thesubstanceofaccusationunder chargeNo[CASE NUMBER]4wasrelatingtounbecomingofa judicial Officer which was found as proved bytheinquiryofficer[CASE NUMBER] Itcannotbesaid [CASE NUMBER] thatsuchconclusionwaswithoutmaterial[CASE NUMBER]
Mr[CASE NUMBER][ENTITY],learnedCounselappearingforthe petitioner, attempted to contend that the said lady employee Ms[CASE NUMBER] [ENTITY] was not examinednoranycomplaintwasreceivedfor the conduct of the delinquent and, therefore, the accusation in charge No[CASE NUMBER]4 cannotbesaidasproved[CASE NUMBER]Inourview,such attempt cannot be countenanced for the simple reason that the charge was not that Ms[CASE NUMBER] [ENTITY] had made any complaint, but thechargewasthatthedelinquenthadclose personalrelationwiththesaidladyandshe usedtositinthechamberofthedelinquent foralongtime[CASE NUMBER]Theattemptwasalsomade by Mr[CASE NUMBER] [ENTITY] to contend that other lady officercouldhavebeenexaminedbeforethe Inquiry officer for showing the conduct of the delinquent and as she is not examined, itcannotbesaidthatthechargeNo[CASE NUMBER]4was proved[CASE NUMBER] Again the said attempt is misconceived, inasmuch as the said attempt cannot be countenanced because the charge was not that the delinquent used to harass the lady employee, but the charge was that the delinquent while on duty was allowing theladyofficertositinthechamberfora longtimeandtherebywasmaintainingclose personalrelationcoupledwiththeaspectas it has come in evidence that during the period when Ms[CASE NUMBER] [ENTITY] was inside the [CASE NUMBER] chamber the door used to remain closed and also locked as stated by one of the advocates who was examined as witness[CASE NUMBER] Further, as recorded by us herein above, when said lady was sitting on dais the delinquent used to tease his leg with the leg of Ms[CASE NUMBER] [ENTITY][CASE NUMBER] Under the circumstances, it cannot be said that the InquiryofficerhasfoundchargeNo[CASE NUMBER]4proved withouttherebeinganysufficientmaterial[CASE NUMBER]
I) On the aspect of sufficient material for conclusion of charge No[CASE NUMBER]5 found to be proved, more or less, the same material which was considered for charge No[CASE NUMBER]1 would berequiredtobeconsideredsinceinoneof the matters, the advocate Mr[CASE NUMBER] [ENTITY] and in other matter Ms[CASE NUMBER] [ENTITY], who also used to frequently sit in the chamber ofthedelinquentwereappearingasadvocate fortherespectiveparties[CASE NUMBER]
J) In the matter of Shri [ENTITY], evidence has come on record that the evidence was recorded by the delinquent in his chamber whentheAdvocate[ENTITY]waspresent, but the accused was not present and he acquitted Shri [ENTITY], who was accused in thecase[CASE NUMBER]
K) Wemaynotrepeattheevidenceconsideredby the Inquiry Officer, but suffice it to [CASE NUMBER] observe that it cannot be said that the conclusion recorded by the Inquiry officer for charge No[CASE NUMBER]5 could not be said to be withouttherebeinganymaterialevidence[CASE NUMBER]
L) BeitrecordedthatasobservedbytheApex Court in the case of [ENTITY] (supra), reproduced by us herein above, whileconsideringthestandardofproofina departmental inquiry, the principles of preponderanceofprobabilitywouldapplyand the Court has to see whether there is evidence on record to reach the conclusion thatthedelinquenthascommittedmisconduct ornot,butsuchconclusionhastomeetwith the test of a prudent person applying prudence for reaching to the said conclusion[CASE NUMBER]
20[CASE NUMBER] In our view, following aspects would lead the inquiryofficerandthedisciplinaryauthorityto reachtheconclusionthatgravemisconductshave beencommittedbythedelinquentinthecapacity asjudicialofficer
(i) Allowing and entertaining three lawyers in chamber for a long time and during the said period the judicial work is sacrificed and the lawyers and the litigants sitting in the Court aremadetowait;
(ii) Sharing of tea and the breakfast and cigaretteswithcertainadvocatesinthechamber [CASE NUMBER] frequentlybytheJudicialofficerforwhichthe expensesarebornebythesaidlawyers;
(iii) No explanation submitted for the aforesaid conduct except that of the work of TalukaLegalAid,butnomaterialisproducedby thedelinquentforanycontributionmadebyany of the said advocates, who were frequently sittinginthechamberforalongtime;
(iv) TakingupofthecasesofthoseAdvocates outofturnandrenderingdecisionsbypreponing ofthedates,thattoo,justpriortodueperiod oftransfer;
(v) Closerelationwiththeladystaff,sharing breakfast and spending time frequently in the chamber during the court hours with the lady staff and compelling the lawyers and the litigantssittinginthecourttowaitduringthe saidperiod[CASE NUMBER]
(vi) Sharingbreakfastwiththeladystaffinthe chamber,allowingthedoortoremainclosedand alsoapplyingthelockforsometime[CASE NUMBER]
(vii) Teasingthelegofaladystaffwhenshe issittingondais;
21[CASE NUMBER] In our view, the aforesaid circumstances would, byapplyingreasonableprudence,gotoshowthat the conduct of the delinquent could be said as notonlyunbecomingofaJudicialofficer,butit [CASE NUMBER] canalsobesaidthatthedecisionrenderedina judicial matter by the Officer in favour of certain Advocates were for the consideration other than judicial and can be termed as for extraneousconsideration[CASE NUMBER]
22[CASE NUMBER] AsobservedbytheApexCourtinthecaseofMs[CASE NUMBER] NirmalaJhala(supra),whichhasbeenreproduced herein above, the Court must exercise the discretionwithgreatcautionkeepinginmindthe larger public interest and unless there is overwhelming public interest which requires interference,theCourtmaynotinterfere[CASE NUMBER]Inour view, if the aforesaid charges of serious misconduct are proved and if the disciplinary authority has exercised powers for imposing of punishmentofdismissalfromservicetothesaid delinquent, who was Judicial Officer, it could not be a case for exercise of a discretion to interferewithsuchdecisionoftheHighCourton administrative side[CASE NUMBER] It is true that higher judiciaryowesadutytoprotectthesubordinate judicial officer, but at the same time, it is equallytruetomaintainpurityinthesystemof administration of justice to impose appropriate punishment if the misconduct is found to be proved[CASE NUMBER]Favourtismshownbyanyjudicialofficer to any party to the proceeding, may be, at the instance of a lawyer or otherwise for the consideration other than judicial, by no means canbetermedasbonafideconductofajudicial [CASE NUMBER][CASE NUMBER] It is the basic requirement of any judicial officer to discharge the duty in an impartialmannerandiftheimpartialityislost, it would adversely affect the system of administrationofjusticeattherootlevel[CASE NUMBER]In thepresentcase,thedegreeofacloserelations and entertaining the lawyer in the chamber has resulted to the extent that public image is created of the officer that only certain advocates would get favour for passing judicial ordersandsuchhasbeensomaterializedwhenthe judicial orders are passed by taking up their matters out of turn in a very unusual manner[CASE NUMBER] Under the circumstances, keeping in view the larger public interest, if the respondent No[CASE NUMBER]2, on administrative side, has taken the decision fordismissalofservice,wedonotfindthatthe punishmentcanbesaidasdisproportionatetothe chargesprovedorthemisconductproved[CASE NUMBER]
23[CASE NUMBER] Mr[CASE NUMBER] [ENTITY], learned counsel appearing for the petitioner,alsomadeanattempttocontendthat the past record of the delinquent prior to the present inquiry was clean, inasmuch as, there werenoadverseremarksforintegrityofthesaid delinquentofficer[CASE NUMBER]Hesubmittedthattakinginto consideration the said aspect, punishment could besaidasdisproportionatetothechargesproved and,therefore,thisCourtmayinterfereonthe quantum of punishment and may substitute the punishmentbyimposingthepunishmentotherthan [CASE NUMBER] thatofdismissalfromservice[CASE NUMBER]
24[CASE NUMBER] Ontheaspectofinterferencewiththequantumof punishmentthelawiswellsettled,inasmuchas, unlessthepunishmentisdisproportionatetothe chargesproved,whileundertakingjudicialreview theCourtwouldnotinterfere[CASE NUMBER]Ifthechargesof serious misconduct are proved and then the punishment is imposed for dismissal of service, we do not find that such punishment would call forinterferenceonameregroundthatinpast, no adverse remarks were recorded for his integrity[CASE NUMBER] Hence, the said contention cannot be accepted[CASE NUMBER]
25[CASE NUMBER] In view of the aforesaid, we find that no interference is called for with the impugned decision as prayed by the petitioner[CASE NUMBER] The petition is dismissed[CASE NUMBER] Rule is discharged[CASE NUMBER] Consideringthefactsandcircumstances,noorder astocosts[CASE NUMBER]
([ENTITY],J[CASE NUMBER]) ([ENTITY],J[CASE NUMBER]) bjoy/sas