Patna High Court orders reinstatement of judicial officer nine years after termination of probation

The Patna High Court recently ordered the reinstatement of a judicial officer whose probation was terminated citing unsatisfactory performance in 2014. [Anchal Dwivedi vs The State Of Bihar And Ors].The division bench of Chief Justice K Vinod Chandran and Justice Partha Sarthy found that there was absolutely no material before the Standing Committee to terminate the services of the Civil Judge (Junior Division) Anchal Dwivedi. .The Court, therefore, ordered the reinstatement of the officer with all consequential benefits, seniority and continuance in service. However, it limited the back wages payable to 50 percent..The judicial officer, Dwivedi had argued that he had a successful stint and had received continued appreciative assessment for his services. The High Court administration, in response, informed the Court that the termination was not punitive. It was also submitted that a number of complaints had been made against the judicial officer and thus his service was not continued. Dwivedi maintained that these complaints arose due to some enmity harboured by a district judge. .The Court opined though the appointing authority can terminate the services of a probationer even without inquiry or explanation, there should be some material on record for such action. The termination should be based on some relevant material so that if the termination is challenged, the authority must be able to satisfy the Court that there were reasonable grounds for the decision.It added that in this case, there was a total absence of such material..Looking into Dwivedi’s service records, the Court found that while he was posted at Bikramganj, there was a complaint made by some advocates against him. In 2011, he was asked to remain careful in his behaviour and maintain judicial aloofness. It also noted there was later a complaint with respect to Dwivedi having allegedly granted permission to construct a temple on the court premises. It was also alleged that the officer had been collecting “subscriptions" for the construction from litigants. However, the judicial officer was exonerated after a disciplinary inquiry, the High Court observed. .The Court further noted that the Registry had put a note for the confirmation of the officer after he passed the departmental examination and completed more than two years of service. He was granted his first increment in 2014 and there was no adverse report against him. Despite this, a Standing Committee recommended his discharge from service, which proposal was approved by the Full Court in May 2014 leading to his termination order. .This was challenged by Dwivedi before the High Court, which has now overturned the termination. Granting relief to Dwivedi, the Court said his service dossier reveals that he was consistently graded outstanding for four and a half years by the High Court.“There is nothing available on the records to sustain the order of the Standing Committee,” the Court concluded and allowed the writ plea. .Senior Advocate Jitendra Singh and Advocates Bajarangi Lal, Yash Singh, and Ishan Singh represented the petitioner (Dwivedi). Government Advocate AB Sinha and Advocate Kalpana represented the State. Advocate Sanjeev Kumar represented the High Court..[Read Judgment]