Supreme Court takes suo motu cognizance of sacking of six women judges by Madhya Pradesh government

The Supreme Court on Friday took suo motu cognizance of the termination of six women judges by the Madhya Pradesh government[In Re: Termination of Civil Judge, Class-II (JR. Division) Madhya Pradesh State Judicial Service]..A Bench of Justices BV Nagarathna and Sanjay Karol appointed Advocate Gaurav Agarwal as amicus curiae to assist the Court in the matter and issued notice to Madhya Pradesh High Court returnable on February 2..In June 2023, the Madhya Pradesh government had terminated the services of the six judges on a recommendation by the Madhya Pradesh High Court. The termination orders were passed by the State law department following an administrative committee and a full court meeting finding their performance during the probation period unsatisfactory. The judges whose services have been terminated include Sarita Chaudhary, who was posted in Umaria; Rachna Atulkar Joshi, who served in Rewa; Priya Sharma from Indore; Sonakshi Joshi from Morena; Aditi Kumar Sharma from Tikamgarh; and Jyoti Barkhade from Timarni..As per the impleadment application filed by one of the judges, despite having an unblemished service record for four years and without any adverse remarks or observations against her, she was illegally terminated without any due process of law. This was a violation of her fundamental rights under Articles 14 and 21 of the Indian Constitution, she contended.According to her, the reasons provided for her termination are not only contrary to the record maintained by Madhya Pradesh High Court, but also show the absolute arbitrariness she has been subjected to.She had highlighted that in the first week of October 2023, she received her Annual Confidential Report (ACR) for the year 2022, wherein she was awarded a grade B (very good) by the Principal District and Sessions Judge and portfolio judge, but a grade D (average) by the Chief Justice of the Madhya Pradesh High Court. This grading, she claimed, was an afterthought as it was passed a month after her termination.Further, the judge highlighted that her termination order was passed even after her probation period had concluded in November 2020. Even if the probation period was extended as per rules, the same could not have gone beyond November 2021, she has stated.Moreover, she has said that if the period of her maternity as well as child care leave is taken into consideration in the quantitative work assessment, it will cause grave injustice to her."It is a settled law that maternity and child care leave is a fundamental right of a women and also the infant, therefore evaluation the Applicant’s performance for the probation period on the basis of the leave taken by her as part of maternity and child care, is grossly violative of her fundamental rights," the application said..The intervenor was represented by Senior Advocate PS Patwalia and advocates Tanvi Dubey. Advocate Charu Mathur also appeared for some of the judges..[Read Order]