The Supreme Court on Friday issued notice in a plea filed by a judicial officer challenging adverse remarks made against her by the High Court, as well as the consequential suspension from service, after she allegedly passed contradictory orders in two delay condonation applications involving nearly 22 years’ delay.
The counsel for the petitioner stated that he had served in the judiciary for 26 years with an “unblemished” and “blotless” career and was due to retire on July 2 upon attaining the age of 65. Addressing the Court, she submitted:
“I got super time-scale, unblemished career for 26 years, blotless career, and one human error. Judicial officers can commit error because there were two similar orders before me. In one, I allowed the condonation of delay, in the other I did not allow.”
She clarified that the petitioner was not questioning the High Court’s authority to set aside or criticise his judicial order on merits, but was aggrieved by the manner in which personal observations were made against her and how termination followed thereafter. The petitioner submitted:
“High Court could have criticised the order and quashed the order. I am here because the High Court condemned the judge as such.”
It further alleged a complete absence of procedural fairness before her removal, stating that no notice, hearing, or show-cause opportunity was granted to her.
“I was not given, not heard, no hearing, no show cause, nothing. I was on my dais holding my hearings. I was told in my ear to step down and thereafter removed unheard.”
Justice Joymalya Bagchi, however, orally remarked that the manner in which the contradictory orders had been passed had deeply disturbed the Court. Referring to the two applications involving identical delay periods, the Bench observed:
“It is shocking our conscience in the manner in which you dealt with the two applications. It is the same order, two different applications, asking for intervention, both had 22 years delay. In one you allow, in another you reject. What happens madam is, 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 admitted the error and stated: “I understand, that is a mistake. I will not defend it.” However, she urged the Court not to let a single mistake define her entire judicial career and requested expunction of the adverse remarks so that she could retire with dignity.
“I always lived in a dignified manner, may I retire in a dignified manner. That is the only thing.”
Without granting any immediate relief to expunge the said adverse remarks, the Bench of Chief Justice Surya Kant, Justice Joymalya Bagchi and Justice Vipul M Pancholi issued notice in the matter.