R. K. Agrawal, J. - (1.) BY means of the present writ petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner, Desh Bhushan Jain, seeks the following reliefs : "(i) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari calling for the record and quashing the impugned order dated 29.4.2005 as communicated to the petitioner on 2.5.2005 (Annexure-3 to the writ petition). (ii) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding the respondents to ignore the order dated 29.4.2005 as communicated to the petitioner on 2.5.2005 (Annexure-3 to the writ petition). (iii) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding the respondents to grant all consequential benefits to the petitioner ignoring the order dated 29.4.2005 with 24% interest per annum. (iv) Issue any order suitable writ, order or direction which this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case. (v) Award cost of the petition in favour of the petitioner."
(2.) BRIEFLY stated, the facts giving rise to the present petition are as follows : Facts of the case : According to the petitioner, after obtaining degree in law, the petitioner started practising in the field of law. The Allahabad High Court conducted selections in the year 1995-96 for the Higher Judicial Service. The petitioner also applied and he was selected and appointed directly on 3.8.1996 as a Higher Judicial Service Officer. His first place of posting was at Moradabad as Additional District and Sessions Judge wherein he remained posted upto 5.6.2000. He was transferred to Farrukhabad and joined there on 7.6.2000. However, subsequently he was posted at Nainital where he joined on 9.6.2000. He remained posted there till 2.9.2001 when he was transferred to Saharanpur where he remained posted from 4.9.2001 to 17.11.2003. Thereafter, he was posted as Special Judge, SC and ST, at Basti, which post he held from 19.11.2003 to 6.6.2005. He was appointed as Additional District and Sessions Judge, Court No. 1, Basti from 6.6.2005, which post he held till the filing of the present petition. According to the petitioner, while he was posted at Saharanpur, the then District Judge, Saharanpur reported adverse remarks for the period 1.4.2003 to 17.11.2003. However, in respect of the preceding years, i.e., 2002-03, the same District Judge, Saharanpur, has himself given good and favourable remarks to the petitioner even certifying his integrity. The petitioner feeling aggrieved against the alleged adverse remarks for the period 1.4.2003 to 17.11.2003 reported by the District Judge, Saharanpur, preferred a representation on the administrative side before the Allahabad High Court through the Registrar General, respondent No. 2. The petitioner sought expunction of the adverse remarks. The matter relating to recording of entries in the character roll of the petitioner for the year 2003-04 came up before the Administrative Judge, Saharanpur and the Administrative Judge recorded the following entry in the character roll of the petitioner : "The work and performance of the officer in the working days is satisfactory. He has good relation with the member of the Bar and brother officers. He had made regular inspections which were effective. He is a fair and impartial officer. Disposal of cases are good. On overall assessment he is rated to be a good officer. Integrity certified."
(3.) IT appears that the representation preferred by the petitioner against the adverse remarks reported by the District Judge, Saharanpur, was not specifically disposed of by the Administrative Judge and had, therefore, remained pending. The repr?sentation was placed before the Administrative committee. The administrative Committee, in its meeting held on 6.4.2005, had been pleased to reject the said representation, which order was communicated to the petitioner vide letter dated 29.4.2005. The order of the Administrative Committee, as communicated to the petitioner is reproduced below : "The remarks of the District Judge be restored. The overall assessment of good and certificate of integrity given by then Hon'ble Administrative Judge is overruled by the Administrative Committee. The representation of the officer is thus rejected." The adverse remarks as reported by the District Judge, Saharanpur, for the period 1.4.2003 to 17.11.2003, pertaining to the year 2003-04 as also the order of the Administrative Committee, reproduced above, are under challenge in the present writ petition on the ground that the same are patently illegal, contrary to law and violative of Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution. Further, as per the circular letter of the High Court, Annual Confidential Report for the year 2003-04 cannot be segregated in two parts as the same is against the concept of service jurisprudence. The alleged adverse remarks which had been recorded in the service record of the petitioner, is patently misconceived, contrary to law, besides being perverse and contrary to material on record and cannot be sustained as they are self-contradictory and appears to have been awarded in a casual manner without assessing the true aspect of the matter. The adverse remarks have also been challenged on merits. Further, the Administrative Judge who is the authority to record entries in the character roll of the petitioner, having given good entry, the adverse remarks reported by the District Judge stood wiped off and therefore, nothing remained for consideration before the administrative committee and the administrative committee had no power of review of the good remarks given by the Administrative Judge to a judicial officer, like the petitioner. The order passed by the Administrative Committee is, therefore, patently illegal and without jurisdiction.;