Allahabad High Court
Awadh Bihari Tiwari vs State Of U.P. & Another on 14 July, 2010
Bench: R.K. Agrawal, Abhinava Upadhya
Court No. - 32 Case :- SPECIAL APPEAL No. - 1558 of 2006 Petitioner :- Awadh Bihari Tiwari Respondent :- State Of U.P. & Another Petitioner Counsel :- Dinesh Rai,U.S. Tiwari Respondent Counsel :- C.S.C.,K.R. Sirohi Hon'ble R.K. Agrawal,J.
Hon'ble Abhinava Upadhya,J.
This is intra Court appeal filed by the appellant against the judgment and order of the learned Single Judge dated 3.11.2006 dismissing the writ petition and declining to interfere with the order dated 11.7.2006 passed by the District Judge, Ballia compulsorily retiring the appellant by invoking the power under Fundamental Rules 56(C) of the Financial Hand Book Volume -2 Part 2 to 4.
We have heard Sri U.S.Tiwari, learned counsel for the appellant, learned counsel for respondent no.2 Sri S.P.Singh, and the learned Standing Counsel for the State- respondent no.1.
The learned Single Judge while dismissing the writ petition of the appellant has upheld the order of the Screening Committee on the ground that the Screening Committee took into account the fact that on 29.4.1997 for not taking thumb impression of witness on the notice, the appellant was penalized with the penalty of Rs. 15/- and that on 7.6.1999 when the appellant was functioning as Chowkidar, he permitted Mohd. Yusuf to enter in the Court premises and the said Mohd. Yusuf indulged in "Marpeet" for which the appellant was censored as he did not furnish this information to the District Judge. The learned Single Judge has held that in this backdrop the Screening Committee formed opinion that continuance of the appellant in the Judgeship was not in public interest and, therefore, the appellant was compulsorily retired. The learned Single Judge has further held ".............The District Judge, Ballia in his wisdom constituted Screening Committee and thereafter on the report of the Screening Committee decision in question has been taken. This Court is not a Court of appeal and settled grounds on which order in question could be assailed, are not at all available in the present case as here opinion has been formed on the material available and said decision could not be termed to be arbitrary."
Learned counsel for the appellant submitted that the same Screening Committee which had recommended the compulsorily retirement of the appellant, in another case has been held to be an invalidly constituted Committee and, therefore, any recommendation by the Committee which has been pronounced by this Court not to have been validly constituted, would be void ab initio. Learned counsel has relied upon a Division Bench judgment of this Court dated 21.4.2010 passed in Special Appeal No. 1223 of 2006 (Dwarika Singh Vs. State of U.P. & another).
That being the case, we are of the considered opinion that the appellant in the present case would also be entitled to the same benefit as that of the appellant in Special Appeal No. 1223 of 2006 (Dwarika Singh Vs. State of U.P. & another).
Learned counsel for the respondents Sri S.P.Singh does not dispute the aforesaid fact and has in fact submitted that he was also heard by the said Division Bench before passing the aforesaid judgment dated 21.4.2010.
Therefore, in view of the judgment dated 21.4.2010 passed in Special Appeal No. 1223 of 2006 (Dwarika Singh Vs. State of U.P. & another), the order of the learned Single Judge impugned in the present appeal cannot be sustained and is, accordingly, set-aside and the order of the District Judge dated 11.7.2006 which has been passed on the recommendation of the Screening Committee is hereby quashed and the appeal is, thus, allowed.
Order Date :- 14.7.2010 SKM