Six yrs after premature retirement HC orders judge’s reinstatement

DIVISIONAL BENCH ORDERED JUDGE TO BE REINSTATED WITHIN FOUR WEEKS, TO GET ARREARS WITH 8% INTEREST

CHANDIGARH : Six years after he was prematurely retired by the Punjab government, a Punjab and Haryana high court division bench has set aside the decision and ordered his reinstatement.

The officer, Ravinder Singh, a civil judge senior division, was prematurely retired in 2012 at the age of 52 on the recommendation of Punjab and Haryana high court. He was retired on the basis of an anonymous complaint and two adverse annual confidential reports by administrative judge. The full court of high court (HC) had recommended premature retirement.

The division bench said that at the time of considering his case for retention along with adverse ACRS, the full court relied on anonymous complaint as if the allegations were proved against the judge and recommended his premature retirement.

The division bench of justice AB Chaudhari and justice Kuldip Singh ordered his reinstatement within four weeks and ordered that he will be entitled for all consequential benefits like continuity in service, seniority and further promotions. He will also get arrears with interest of 8%.

“An honest and strict judicial officer is likely to have adversaries. If complaints are entertained in trifling matters and if the HC encourages anonymous complaints, no judicial officer would feel secure and it would be difficult for him to discharge his duties in an honest and independent manner,” the division bench said, adding it is imperative that the HC should take steps to protect honest judicial officers by ignoring ill- conceived or motivated complaints made by unscrupulous lawyers and litigants, the court added.

HC division bench said that in recording the ACRS, the HC being the constitutional authority, has to be “fairer than the fair” and set bench marks for the other authorities. “The officers working under the control of the high court look towards the high court not only for the discipline but also for dignity. The judicial officers have to be treated fairly and no unwarranted remarks without any basis / material or reasoning should be recorded,” the division bench said.