MUMBAI: A departmental inquiry will also be initiated against a judicial officer if there used to be verifiable material to verify the allegations, in the absence of a written complaint and an affidavit, the Bombay prime courtroom has stated.
A department bench of Justices R M Savant and S V Kotwal on May 4 disregarded a petition filed by a civil judge (junior department), Asif Tahasildar, challenging an order of July 15, 2017 issued by the prime courtroom registrar, beginning departmental inquiry against him on two other charges.
The first charge used to be for allegedly misusing the reputable place to cause wrongful achieve for oneself and loss to the state exchequer, when Tahasildar used to be a civil judge in Jalna district.
The 2nd inquiry used to be initiated after Tahasildar allegedly assaulted a person and threatened to imprison him in a false case, when he used to be a judge in Kolhapur.
The petition claimed that the departmental inquiry, initiated against Tahalsildar, used to be in breach of the guidelines issued by the Chief Justice of India, which mandated a written complaint accompanied with a duly sworn affidavit against a judicial officer earlier than the initiation of inquiry.
In this example there used to be no written complaint, the petition stated.
The bench, after perusing the facts of the matter, seen that in each the instances, earlier than beginning the departmental inquiry lawsuits, the main judges of the courts concerned (Jalna and Kolhapur) had performed discreet inquiry and had additionally taken the petitioner's answer under consideration.
The HC registrar handed the order beginning departmental inquiry simplest after receiving experiences from the main judges concerned, the courtroom stated.
"Hence, so far as the departmental inquiries against the petitioner are concerned, there was verifiable material to substantiate the allegations made," the courtroom stated.
It is, therefore, now not imaginable to simply accept the petitioner's contention that in the absence of a written complaint accompanied by a duly-sworn affidavit no departmental inquiry will also be initiated, the courtroom stated.
The courtroom additionally refused to simply accept the petitioner's argument that once he used to be issued a show-cause understand, his aspect of the tale used to be now not heard or taken into consideration.
"The disciplinary authority is under no obligation at the stage of issuing a show-cause notice to afford any opportunity of hearing to a delinquent," the courtroom stated.
"The disciplinary authority has to only consider whether there are grounds for proceeding with an inquiry so as to ascertain the truth behind the allegations against the judicial officer," the courtroom stated.
Merely because no hearing used to be afforded previous to the disciplinary authority coming to a conclusion to continue departmentally against the petitioner, does now not imply that the foundations of herbal justice were violated, the bench stated.
The petitioner can take part in the departmental inquiry initiated against him and refute or dispel the fees, the courtroom stated.
A department bench of Justices R M Savant and S V Kotwal on May 4 disregarded a petition filed by a civil judge (junior department), Asif Tahasildar, challenging an order of July 15, 2017 issued by the prime courtroom registrar, beginning departmental inquiry against him on two other charges.
The first charge used to be for allegedly misusing the reputable place to cause wrongful achieve for oneself and loss to the state exchequer, when Tahasildar used to be a civil judge in Jalna district.
The 2nd inquiry used to be initiated after Tahasildar allegedly assaulted a person and threatened to imprison him in a false case, when he used to be a judge in Kolhapur.
The petition claimed that the departmental inquiry, initiated against Tahalsildar, used to be in breach of the guidelines issued by the Chief Justice of India, which mandated a written complaint accompanied with a duly sworn affidavit against a judicial officer earlier than the initiation of inquiry.
In this example there used to be no written complaint, the petition stated.
The bench, after perusing the facts of the matter, seen that in each the instances, earlier than beginning the departmental inquiry lawsuits, the main judges of the courts concerned (Jalna and Kolhapur) had performed discreet inquiry and had additionally taken the petitioner's answer under consideration.
The HC registrar handed the order beginning departmental inquiry simplest after receiving experiences from the main judges concerned, the courtroom stated.
"Hence, so far as the departmental inquiries against the petitioner are concerned, there was verifiable material to substantiate the allegations made," the courtroom stated.
It is, therefore, now not imaginable to simply accept the petitioner's contention that in the absence of a written complaint accompanied by a duly-sworn affidavit no departmental inquiry will also be initiated, the courtroom stated.
The courtroom additionally refused to simply accept the petitioner's argument that once he used to be issued a show-cause understand, his aspect of the tale used to be now not heard or taken into consideration.
"The disciplinary authority is under no obligation at the stage of issuing a show-cause notice to afford any opportunity of hearing to a delinquent," the courtroom stated.
"The disciplinary authority has to only consider whether there are grounds for proceeding with an inquiry so as to ascertain the truth behind the allegations against the judicial officer," the courtroom stated.
Merely because no hearing used to be afforded previous to the disciplinary authority coming to a conclusion to continue departmentally against the petitioner, does now not imply that the foundations of herbal justice were violated, the bench stated.
The petitioner can take part in the departmental inquiry initiated against him and refute or dispel the fees, the courtroom stated.
Evidence enough for probe if no complaint: HC
![Evidence enough for probe if no complaint: HC]()
Reviewed by Kailash
on
May 07, 2018
Rating:
