Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

(b) Rs. 7,59,647.00 asinterest at 18% per annum on delayedpayments.

In regard to the said adverse remarks relating to the year 1988, he filed objections dated 15-9-1989 requesting for expunction.

6. The Governor of Karnataka, made the Karnataka Judicial Services (Recruitment) Rules, 1983 (for short 'Recruitment Rules') in exercise of his powers under Articles 233, 234 and proviso to Article 309 of the Constitution, in regard to recruitment to the posts of District Judges, Civil Judges, and Munsiffs. The said Recruitment Rules were amended by the Karnataka Judicial Service (Recruitment) (Amendment) Rules, 1989 creating a new category of posts known as District Judges (Super-time Scale). The Amended Rules came into effect on 3-8-1989. The method of recruitment for the newly created posts of District Judges (Supertime Scale) is by promotion by selection from the cadre of District Judges. The Government issued a notification dated 28-7-1989 sanctioning upgradation of ten posts in the cadre of District Judges (Supertime Scale).

". ... Sri Rajagopal Gangadhar Sajekan is not yet fit to be selected for promotion to the cadre of District Judges (Supertime Sealer)".

8. The matter was thereafter placed before the Full Court on 6-9-1989. After considering the case of the 15 District Judges in the order of seniority with reference to their C.Rs. and all other relevant facts, the Full Court resolved to select and promote the 10 District Judges recommended by the Administrative Committee No. 1, to the cadre of District Judges (Supertime Scale). It further resolved that the petitioner is not fit to be selected for promotion to the cadre of District Judges (Super-time Scale). Accordingly, a notification dated 16-9-1989 was issued in regard to the promotion of 10 District Judges to the cadre of District Judges (Supertime Scale).

22.2 When objections to the adverse remarks are considered and the adverse remarks are either toned down/modified/expunged, then there should be a de novo consideration of the case of the officer concerned for promotion as from the date when his juniors were promoted. In this case, as petitioner was not promoted to the cadre of District Judges (Supertime Scale) when his juniors were promoted by notification dated 16-9-1989, on the basis of the adverse remarks relating to 1987 and 1988, the High Court ought to have reconsidered his case for promotion to the cadre of District Judges (Supertime Scale) after its order dated 4-5-1990 (holding that the Adverse Remark No. II (1987) was not an adverse remark, but only for guidance) and the order dated 8-2-1990 (deleting the adverse remarks in columns 9 to 11 of confidential record for the year 1988) and failure to do so is illegal.

22.3 The reports of the Inquiring Authority dated 29-6-1993 and 30-6-1993 in DI Case No. 1 of 1989 and DI Case No. 2 of 1991 were made by the Inquiry Authority after the announcement regarding his appointment as the Chief Justice of the Madras High Court and therefore the Reports should be treated as having been given by a person without jurisdiction or authority, 22.4 The petitioner had raised several objections to the Inquiry Reports dated 29-6-1993 and 30-6-1993. Though normally the Disciplinary Authority need not give reasons where he agrees with the findings of the Inquiring Authority, where issues relating to competence of Inquiry Authority to hold or continue the inquiry are raised in the objections, the Disciplinary Authority is bound to consider them. Further the failure of the Disciplinary Authority to deal with several points raised by petitioner in his objections to the Inquiry Reports amounts to non-application of mind, vitiating the final orders of the Disciplinary Authority accepting the Inquiry Reports and imposing punishments. Therefore the orders dated 17-11-1993 imposing punishment in DI Case Nos. 1 of 1989 and 2 of 1991 are liable to be set aside, 22.5 There is no justification or grounds for the High Court to retire him under Rule 285(4) of the KCSRs. On the other hand, on account of blemishless service rendered by him, he should have been considered for promotion to Supertime Scale retrospectively with effect from the date his juniors were promoted to Supertime Scale.