Persuade Judicial Officers Having Good Track Record To Withdraw Resignation : Supreme Court To HCs

The Supreme Court endorsed the practice followed by some High Courts of persuading a Judicial Officer having good track record to withdraw the resignation tendered by him/her."Losing a good Judicial Officer without counselling him/her and without giving him/her an opportunity to introspect and rethink, will not be in the interest of either the Judicial Officer or the Judiciary", the bench comprising Justices L. Nageswara Rao and BR Gavai said.The court observed thus while directing the Madhya Pradesh High Court to reinstate a resigned woman Additional District Judge, who had raised sexual harassment allegations against a then sitting judge of the Madhya Pradesh High Court. In this case, the writ petitioner alleged that hostile transfer orders were passed as she did not act as per the demands of the supervising High Court judge. She complained that was faced with transfer from a Category 'A' city to Category 'C' city and also a Naxal affected area, in violation of the extant transfer policy of the High Court. Since the transfer would have prevented her from being with her daughter who was then appearing for the board exams, she was faced with no option but to resign. Later, she approached the Supreme Court asserting her right to be reinstated.While examining this case, the court noted that : (1) The transfer order was issued on 8th July 2014. (2) The petitioner made a representation on the very next day i.e. 9th July 2014, and the same was rejected within two days i.e. 11th July 2014. (3) On 11th July 2014, the petitioner made another representation. However, that also did not find favour with respondent No. 1(High Court) and was rejected on 14th July 2014, on the ground that the earlier representation on identical grounds was already rejected. (12th July 2014 was a second Saturday, 13th July 2014 was a Sunday ) (4) On the very next working day i.e. 14th July 2014, her second representation was rejected. (5) On 15th July 2014, the petitioner tendered her resignation. (6) On the next day i.e. 16th July 2014, the MP High Court with the recommendation for acceptance of the same, forwarded it to respondent No.2. (7) On the very next day i.e. 17th July 2014, respondent No. 2 accepted the same. Taking note of this timeline and the fact that her assessment for the year 2013, during which, she would be deemed to be confirmed, was 'very good'. the bench observed thus:86. It will not be out of place to mention that in some High Courts, a practice is followed, that whenever a Judicial Officer having good track record tenders his/her resignation, an attempt is made by the Senior Judges of the High Court to counsel and persuade him/her to withdraw the resignation. Valuable time and money is spent on training of a Judicial Officer. Losing a good Judicial Officer without counselling him/her and without giving him/her an opportunity to introspect and rethink, will not be in the interest of either the Judicial Officer or the Judiciary. We find that it will be in the interest of judiciary that such a practice is followed by all the High Courts.The court therefore held that, in peculiar facts and circumstances of the case, the petitioner's resignation dated 15th July 2014, could not be construed to be voluntary."Though, it may not be possible to observe that the petitioner was forced to resign, however, the circumstances enumerated hereinabove, would clearly reveal that they were such, that out of frustration, the petitioner was left with no other alternative", the court observed.Case name: Ms. X vs Registrar General, High Court of Madhya PradeshCitation: 2022 LiveLaw (SC) 150Case no.|date: WP(C)1137 OF 2018 | 10 Feb 2022Coram : Justices L. Nageswara Rao and BR GavaiCounsel: Sr. Adv Indira Jaising for petitioner, SG Tushar Mehta for respondentsCaselawFactual Summary - The writ petitioner alleged that hostile transfer orders were passed as she did not act as per the demands of the supervising High Court judge. She complained that was faced with transfer from a Category 'A' city to Category 'C' city and also a Naxal affected area, in violation of the extant transfer policy of the High Court. Since the transfer would have prevented her from being with her daughter who was then appearing for the board exams, she was faced with no option but to resign. Later, she approached the Supreme Court asserting her right to be reinstated. The Supreme Court Held: Though, it may not be possible to observe that the petitioner was forced to resign, however, the circumstances would clearly reveal that they were such, that out of frustration, the petitioner was left with no other alternative.The petitioner's resignation from the post of Additional District & Sessions Judge, Gwalior dated 15th July 2014, cannot be construed to be voluntary and as such, the order dated 17th July 2014, passed by the respondent No. 2, thereby accepting...

Persuade Judicial Officers Having Good Track Record To Withdraw Resignation : Supreme Court To HCs

LIVELAW NEWS NETWORK

Tags