- (1.) THIS writ petition has been filed for quashing the impugned orders dated 11-8-2004 and 7-8-2003 passed by respondent No. 5. By the ultimate order dated 20th September, 2005 (Annexure-11 to the writ petition) the Registrar General of this High Court communicated that under the order of the Chief Justice dated 17th September, 2005 punishment of withholding one annual grade with cumulative effect is imposed upon the petitioner. From the record it appears that this order was passed on the charges of humiliating his superior in the office in the presence of other subordinate officers for which the authority considered him guilty of misconduct and indiscipline amounting to grave in nature. In the annual confidential report 2003-04 he is carrying unsatisfactory remarks and is facing departmental enquiry regarding his misbehaviours with his senior officers.
(2.) HOWEVER, we are not inclined to take a decision in respect of such facts sitting in a writ Court. We have to consider the decision making process but not the decision. A question arose about passing interim order on the earlier occasion by a Division Bench of this Court on 30th November, 2005. The Division Bench held that the order dated 17th September, 2005 as mentioned in the order dated 20th September, 2005, impugned hereinabove, was not supplied to the petitioner, the same is in violation of natural justice, therefore, the petitioner is entitled to an interim order and as such order was passed. We have called for entire record to find out that the order dated 17th September, 2005 passed by the Chief Justice of this High Court. Upon opening the sealed cover it is produced before us when we have directed the learned Counsel appearing for High Court to show the order to the learned Counsel for the petitioner for his satisfaction. It is recorded thereunder that the copy of enquiry report was served upon the delinquent with show cause notice. In response, the delinquent had submitted his representation but he did not take any additional ground or plea other than what has been taken before. The delinquent failed to produce evidence in his defence and he failed to prove his being innocence. Therefore, the Chief Justice withheld increment for the charge of misconduct and misbehaviour with his superior in the office. The Chief Justice further held that for the charge of humiliating his superior in the office in the presence of subordinate officers is a misconduct and indiscipline of grave nature and for the same, punishment of withholding one annual grade with cumulative effect was awarded. According to us a Chief Justice is empowered to take a final decision so far as the employees of the High Court is concerned finally as per Article 229 of the Constitution of India. There are several screening processes of considering of the cases before reaching to the Chief Justice. The decision taken by the Chief Justice is found just and prudent.
(3.) WE cannot behave like appellate Court over the matter only on the basis of allegation of the petitioner that there was personal jealousy with respondent No. 4. Therefore, in totality we find no ground to interfere in the order impugned. Hence, the writ petition is dismissed. Interim order, if any, stands vacated. There shall be no order as to costs.;