Woman Judge Objects To ACR Entries Made After Petition For Child Care Leave; Supreme Court Seeks HC Response

The Supreme Court today (June 11) issued notice in an Interlocutory Application filed by the lady Additional District Judge alleging that after she filed a writ petition challenging the rejection of her childcare leave, some remarks have been made in her Annual Confidential Report (ACR) suggesting performance counselling to her.The Supreme Court bench of Chief Justice of India BR Gavai and Justice AG Masih, on May 29, had issued notice to the State of Jharkhand and the Jharkhand High Court in her original writ petition. The petitioner, who is a judicial officer from the Scheduled Caste Category and a single parent, had sought a child care leave from June -December for 194 days, which was rejected without giving her any valid reasons as claimed. As per the Child Care Rules, the petitioner is entitled to 730 days of leave; presently, she is seeking a leave of 6 months. Today, her IA was before the vacation bench of Justice Prashant Kumar Mishra and Justice Manmohan. The advocate for the petitioner informed the bench that while leave was sought for 194 days, the leave has only been sanctioned for 92 days. He added: "One thing more, very disturbing, now there are some entries in my ACR, which I have also brought on record, subsequent to my filing writ petition...I am an officer belonging to SC category, I have disposed of huge number of cases-one of the best performing officer, mylord...now some entries in my ACR, in the name of performance counselling, communicated to me on 23rd May...my career record has been outstanding till date...Kindly see my performance, I have given data, 4660 cases..."Justice Manmohan suggested that the issue now being raised does not fall within the subject-matter of the present writ petition and therefore, an IA should be filed. The court was subsequently informed that an application in this regard has been filed..Whereas, the advocate, appearing for the High Court of Jharkhand, argued that this is a fallout case in reference to a transfer order. He added that 92 days leave has been sanctioned and the 730 days, as per the Child Care Rules, is the leave an officer can take in her entire career and not in one duration. He added: "The problem is, this will became a precedent, now, if she goes out for 8 months at a stretch and being a district and sessions judge, it will be very difficult to accommodate the disposal of matters, and the head of the district is itself out for such a long period."Subsequent to this, the Court admitted the IA and issued notice.Order: "Consequent to our order dated 6-6-2025, the Respondent High Court has filed affidavit stating that petitioner's application for childcare leave has been reconsidered by the High Court and order has been passed to give childcare leave for 92 days commencing from 10-6-2025 to 9-9-2025 with permission to leave the headquarters. At this stage, learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that she applied for leave for 194 days; however, the childcare leave has been allowed for 94 days. It is also submitted, as a counterblast to the present petition, that the petitioner has been conveyed an ACR, dated 9-5-25, against which the petitioner has preferred an application for directions. Issue notice of IA to the respondent, let the counter to the main writ petition and IA be filed within 4 weeks. Post in the first week of August.Case Details: KASHIKA M PRASAD Vs STATE OF JHARKHAND|W.P.(C) No. 554/2025

Woman Judge Objects To ACR Entries Made After Petition For Child Care Leave; Supreme Court Seeks HC Response

Gursimran Kaur Bakshi

Tags