Ranjan Gogoi, C.J. - (1.) THE Petitioner, who was a member of the Superior Judicial Service of State of Haryana, has challenged, through this writ petition, an order dated 01.11.2002 (Annexure P -1) by which he was put under suspension, a charge -sheet dated 26.03.2003 (Annexure P -3) as also the order dated 16.03.2004 (Annexure P -5) retiring him from service on his attaining the age of 58 years. A further prayer has been made for implementation of the order dated 19.09.2003 passed by a Division Bench of this Court in Civil Revision No. 3828 of 2002 (Annexure P -2) with a consequential prayer for reinstatement in service and grant of other service benefits.
(2.) THE facts which can be culled out from the pleadings and submissions made by the parties at the hearing can be summed up as follows: The Petitioner joined the judicial service in 1977 and earned his due promotions on time. His record of service is reasonably good except for the initial period when he joined service. He has been assessed as 'Good' or above since the year 1981 -82 in the Annual Confidential Reports. While the Petitioner was posted as an Additional District and Sessions Judge in Panchkula, he decided a Rent Appeal on 15.06.2002 which was challenged in the High Court by filing a revision application i.e. Civil Revision No. 3828 of 2002. In the said revision petition, the learned Single Judge hearing the case, by order dated 31.07.2002, called for the explanation of the Petitioner by observing therein that he had committed judicial indiscipline by entertaining the appeal against the order of Rent Controller and directing the ex -parte adjustment of the tenant/Respondent by ignoring the law laid down by the Full Bench and Division Bench of this Court. In compliance to this order, the Petitioner submitted an explanation dated 16.09.2002. On receipt of the said explanation, the learned Single Judge recorded a note dated 08.10.2002 stating that scandalous allegations had been made against the learned Single Judge by the Petitioner in his aforesaid explanation dated 16.9.2002. The matter was directed to be and was placed before the Acting Chief Justice who observed that the conduct of the officer was wholly unbecoming of a judicial officer and amounted to a grave misconduct. The note of the learned Single Judge and the accompanying papers were directed to be placed before the Full Court. The Full Court considered the same in its meeting on 30.10.2002 and decided that the officer be suspended forthwith and a charge -sheet be issued for major penalty. The Petitioner was, accordingly, suspended by impugned order dated 01.11.2002 (Annexure P -1) and a charge -sheet was issued to him by memo dated 26.03.2003 (Annexure P -3). The reply submitted by the Petitioner was placed before the Full Court on 18.07.2003 and the matter was referred to the Charge -sheet Committee where it is still pending.
(3.) IN Civil Revision No. 3828 of 2002, because of a compromise between the landlord and the tenant, the revision petition was dismissed as withdrawn by order dated 18.09.2002. The Rule issued by order dated 31.07.2002 to the Petitioner with regard to his alleged judicial indiscipline and the explanation submitted on 16.09.2002 to the show cause notice, however, remained pending. The Chief Justice, by his order dated 15.09.2003, directed the listing of the explanation of the Petitioner before a Special Division Bench of this Court. On the basis of an amended explanation submitted by the Petitioner the show cause notice issued to the Petitioner was dropped by order dated 19.09.2003 of the Special Division Bench.;