NDLI: Abhay Jain Vs. The High Court of Judicature for Rajasthan and Anr

Content Provider	Supreme Court of India
e-ISSN	30484839
Language	English
Access Restriction	NDLI
Subject Keyword	Judicial Service – Rajasthan Judicial Service Rules 2010
Content Type	Text
Resource Type	Law Judgement
Jurisdiction	India
Case(s) Referred	Referred Case 0 Referred Case 1 Referred Case 2 Referred Case 3 Referred Case 4 Referred Case 5 Referred Case 6 Referred Case 7 Referred Case 8 Referred Case 9
Case Type	Appeal
Court	Supreme Court of India
Disposal Nature	Appeal Allowed
Headnote	Judicial Service – Rajasthan Judicial Service Rules, 2010 – rr. 45 and 46 – Entitlement to protection u/Art. 311 of the Constitution – Bail order dated 27.04.2015 passed by Appellant-judicial officer in favour an accused in a case under Prevention of Corruption Act became genesis of action taken against him – Departmental enquiry instituted against him u/r.16 of Rajasthan Civil Services (Classification, Control and Appeal) Rules, 1958 for acts amounting to misconduct and violation of rr. 3 and 4 of the Rajasthan Civil Services (Conduct Rules), 1971 – Allegation leveled that appellant passed the bail order with ulterior or oblique motives and for extraneous considerations – Appellant submitted preliminary objections to the allegations, which came to be rejected by the Enquiry Judge – Meanwhile, Higher Judicial Committee, constituted for deciding confirmation and discharge of Judicial Officers, upon inspection of appellant’s records, decided not to recommend the appellant for confirmation – Subsequently, a Full Court meeting was convened wherein, based on recommendation submitted by the Higher Judicial Committee, it was decided to discharge the appellant – Appellant was thus discharged despite pendency of enquiry proceedings against him – Discharge order was passed against the appellant on ground that the Full Court found the appellant’s services to be unsatisfactory during probation – Subsequently, enquiry as well as disciplinary proceedings initiated against the appellant were closed – Writ petition filed by appellant dismissed by High Court – On appeal, held: There was no material to showcase unsatisfactory performance of appellant in terms of requirement u/ rr. 45 and 46 of the RJS Rules, 2010 – Moreover, appellant’s discharge was not simpliciter, as claimed by the respondent – Non-communication of ACRs to the appellant was proved to be arbitrary and since respondent choose to hold enquiry into appellant’s alleged misconduct, the termination of his service was by way of punishment because it put a stigma on his competence and thus affected his future career – In such a case, the appellant would be entitled to protection of Art. 311(2) of the Constitution – Moreover, adverse comments in ACR for the year 2015 could not have been the basis on which appellant was discharged from service – Appellant was never granted opportunity to improve and there was no intimation to him about his performance being unsatisfactory – Importantly, no verifiable complaint was filed against the appellant that could form the basis of disciplinary proceedings against him – Appellant was competent to pass the bail order dated 27.04.2015 and Respondent was not able to prove presence of any extraneous consideration or ulterior motive on the part of the appellant – Also neither the bail order dated 27.04.2015 was ever challenged by the State before any Court of law, nor was any complaint received against the appellant regarding the said bail order – This is not the case where there were strong grounds to suspect the appellant’s bona fides – Even if appellant’s act was considered to be negligent, it cannot be treated as “misconduct” – The discharge order is accordingly quashed – Keeping in view that the appellant had not worked as judicial officer after he was discharged, he be reinstated with all consequential benefits including continuity of service and seniority, but with only 50% backwages – Constitution of India, 1950 – Art. 311.Service Law – Judicial Service – Every judicial officer is likely to commit mistake of some kind or the other in passing orders in the initial stage of his service, which a mature judicial officer would not do – However, if the orders are passed without there being any corrupt motive, the same should be over-looked by the High Court and proper guidance should be provided to him.Service Law – Judicial Service – Merely because a wrong order has been passed by the appellant-judicial officer or the action taken by him could have been different, this does not warrant initiation of disciplinary proceedings against the judicial officer. Service Law – Judicial service – Negligence vis-a-vis misconduct – On facts, appellant-judicial officer, while passing the bail order, may have been guilty of negligence in the sense that he did not carefully go through the case file and did not take notice of the order of the High Court which was on his file – This negligence cannot be treated to be misconduct. Service Law – Misconduct – Mere suspicion cannot constitute “misconduct” – Any ‘probability’ of misconduct needs to be supported with oral or documentary material. Service Law – Judicial service – Relief-oriented judicial approaches cannot by themselves be grounds to cast aspersions on the honesty and integrity of an officer.
Judge	Hon'ble Mr. Justice Vineet Saran
Neutral Citation	2022 INSC 309
Petitioner	Abhay Jain
Respondent	The High Court Of Judicature For Rajasthan And Anr
SCR	[2022] 16 S.C.R. 693
Judgement Date	2022-03-15
Case Number	2029

Sl.	Authority	Responsibilities	Communication Details
1	Ministry of Education (GoI), Department of Higher Education	Sanctioning Authority	https://www.education.gov.in/ict-initiatives
2	Indian Institute of Technology Kharagpur	Host Institute of the Project: The host institute of the project is responsible for providing infrastructure support and hosting the project	https://www.iitkgp.ac.in
3	National Digital Library of India Office, Indian Institute of Technology Kharagpur	The administrative and infrastructural headquarters of the project	Dr. B. Sutradhar bsutra@ndl.gov.in
4	Project PI / Joint PI	Principal Investigator and Joint Principal Investigators of the project	Dr. B. Sutradhar bsutra@ndl.gov.in Prof. Saswat Chakrabarti will be added soon
5	Website/Portal (Helpdesk)	Queries regarding NDLI and its services	support@ndl.gov.in
6	Contents and Copyright Issues	Queries related to content curation and copyright issues	content@ndl.gov.in
7	National Digital Library of India Club (NDLI Club)	Queries related to NDLI Club formation, support, user awareness program, seminar/symposium, collaboration, social media, promotion, and outreach	clubsupport@ndl.gov.in
8	Digital Preservation Centre (DPC)	Assistance with digitizing and archiving copyright-free printed books	dpc@ndl.gov.in
9	IDR Setup or Support	Queries related to establishment and support of Institutional Digital Repository (IDR) and IDR workshops	idr@ndl.gov.in

Abhay Jain Vs. The High Court of Judicature for Rajasthan and Anr

Please Log-in to view this content

High Court of Judicature for Rajasthan Vs. Veena Verma & Anr.

High Court of Judicature for Rajasthan Vs. P.p. Singh and Anr

Gurpal Singh Vs. High Court of Judicature for Rajasthan

Rajasthan High Court, Jodhpur & Anr. Vs. Neetu Harsh & Anr.

D.k. Agarwal Vs. High Court of Judicature At Allahabad

Dinesh Kumar Gupta and Others Vs. High Court of Judicature of Rajasthan Others

High Court of Judicature At Allahabad Through Registrar Vs. Sarnam Singh and Anr.

Rajasthan High Court Vs. Ved Priya & Anr.

Registrar, High Court of Gujarat and Anr. Vs. C.g. Sharma

Abhay Jain Vs. The High Court of Judicature for Rajasthan and Anr

Abhay Jain Vs. The High Court of Judicature for Rajasthan and Anr

Please Log-in to view this content

Similar Documents

High Court of Judicature for Rajasthan Vs. Veena Verma & Anr.

High Court of Judicature for Rajasthan Vs. P.p. Singh and Anr

Gurpal Singh Vs. High Court of Judicature for Rajasthan

Rajasthan High Court, Jodhpur & Anr. Vs. Neetu Harsh & Anr.

D.k. Agarwal Vs. High Court of Judicature At Allahabad

Dinesh Kumar Gupta and Others Vs. High Court of Judicature of Rajasthan Others

High Court of Judicature At Allahabad Through Registrar Vs. Sarnam Singh and Anr.

Rajasthan High Court Vs. Ved Priya & Anr.

Registrar, High Court of Gujarat and Anr. Vs. C.g. Sharma

Abhay Jain Vs. The High Court of Judicature for Rajasthan and Anr