Delhi High Court Rejects Retired Judge MM Dhonchak's Appeal, Upholds Extension Of Suspension From Chandigarh DRT

The Delhi High Court yesterday upheld a single judge ruling upholding the extension of suspension of MM Dhonchak, a retired judicial officer and former Presiding Officer of Debts Recovery Tribunal (DRT), Chandigarh. A division bench comprising Justice Navin Chawla and Justice Renu Bhatnagar dismissed Dhonchak's appeal against the single judge order of March 03 dismissing his petition against the second order of extension of suspension. Appearing in person, Dhonchak submitted that he was being penalized for doing his work diligently and in a professional manner and that because he was unwilling to accommodate the lawyers, false complaints were made against him.It was argued that there Single Judge wrongly opined that revoking his suspension would not be conducive to the conduct of a fair inquiry. The Central Government submitted that the findings of the competent authority were based on verifiable records, including written complaints from the DRT Bar Association, administrative notings, documented conduct affecting judicial decorum, and reports prepared by competent authorities.It was contended that Dhonchak could not seek continuation in active judicial service as a matter of right, particularly when the disciplinary process was pending. Rejecting the appeal, the Bench said that the nature of the charges on which Dhonchak was being proceeded against was grave and his acts were stated to be prejudicial to the public interest. It noted that various orders of the Punjab and Haryana High Court made scathing comments on the conduct of Dhonchak in his capacity as the Presiding Officer of the DRT.“Tested on the above principles of law governing the scrutiny of an order of suspension or its continuation, no fault can be found in the order extending the suspension of the appellant,” it said. The Bench also said that there was sufficient material before the competent authority to continue with the suspension of Dhonchak and that it will be for the Competent Authority to take requisite steps to also ensure that the litigants do not suffer due to the suspension of and the DRT functions to discharge its duties.“Equally, while we are in prima facie agreement with the submission of the appellant, that the reasons for continuation of his suspension as contained in the sealed cover produced by the respondent before the learned Single Judge, should have been disclosed to him in absence of any claim for privilege, at the same time, the reasons for the same were not only disclosed in the reply affidavit of the respondent, but were also discernable from the entire facts as presented before the learned Single Judge. For the said reasons alone, the Impugned Judgement cannot be faulted,” the Court concluded. Title: MM DHONCHAK v. UNION OF INDIACitation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 727Click here to read order

Delhi High Court Rejects Retired Judge MM Dhonchak's Appeal, Upholds Extension Of Suspension From Chandigarh DRT

Nupur Thapliyal

Tags