LAKSHMANAN, CJ. - (1.) HEARD Shri Arun Sharma, learned counsel for the petitioner.
(2.) THE petitioner is a judicial officer serving in the rank of Additional District Judge. He joined the Service in 1980. According to him, from the year 1980 to 1987, the service record and performance had been unblemished and that there had been no complaint about his work, integrity or otherwise. For the first time on 1. 10. 1997, the petitioner was served with a charge-sheet (Annex.-1 ). With reference to the said charge-sheet, the petitioner has made some allegations against one Shri K. L. Vyas. Annexure-2 is the reply to the above charge sheet. Till the month of November, 2000 the petitioner had been served with as many as seven charge-sheets through one Shri Sampat Raj Sharma, who retired in the year 1999. According to the petitioner, a perusal of the records regarding all the charge will show that either Shri Sampat Raj Sharma or Shri K. L. Vyas were involved in the process of issuing the charge-sheets. THEse charge-sheets have been marked as Annex. 11 to 17. According to the petitioner the charge sheet dated 21. 12. 1999 (Annex. 11), though a report was submitted before the Full Court. Again the petitioner received a letter dated 23. 3. 2001 asking him to submit reply to the charge sheet. This, according to the petitioner, the matter has now been reopened. We have perused the memorandum of charges Annex-1 and Annexures 11 to 17. Annexure-1 (Memo No. 1178 dated 1. 10. 97):- As regards Annexure-1, Memorandum No. 1178 dated 1. 10. 97 a departmental enquiry under Rule 17 of the Rajasthan Civil Services (Classification, Control and Appeal) Rules, 1958 (for short `the CC & A Rules') was initiated against the petitioner. The allegation against the petitioner is that he refused to sign the order-sheets when he was authorised to do so and also refused to obey the request of the District Judge to sign the order sheets on 10. 12. 96 and on the next day he also refused to sign the order sheets and disobeyed the oral request of the District Judge, conveyed to him through the Reader and Clerk of the Court of Additional District Judge No. 1, Ajmer and this act of the petitioner tantamount to gross disobedience of the orders of the District Judge. Annexure-11: (Memo No. 4470 dated 17. 12. 99):- For this an enquiry under Rule 16 of the CC & A Rules was initiated against the petitioner. The charge against the petitioner was that he refused to vacate the government accommodation allotted to him when he was transferred from Ajmer to Sawai Madhopur and that he did not vacate the aforesaid government accommodation which was earmarked for the CJM, Ajmer. He did not seek permission to retain the aforesaid government accommodation from the District Judge. The charge was that he flouted the authority of the District Judge, Ajmer and the Hon'ble High Court while making correspondence with the Govt. of Rajasthan and also disregarded the directions issued by this Court vide Circular No. 12 P. I. dated 9. 8. 91 and Circular No. 17 P. I. dated 11. 8. 1998 etc. Annexure-12: (Memo No. 4532 dated 21. 12. 1999):- An enquiry under Rule 16 of the CC & A Rules was initiated against the petitioner so far this memo is concerned. When the petitioner was posted as Civil Judge (SD) & Chief Judicial Magistrate, Ajmer in 1995, a criminal case State vs. Mrs. Jamila Singh was pending in the Court of Judicial Magistrate No. 1. The petitioner withdrew the aforesaid criminal case to his court on a complaint on 22. 9. 1995 and issued summons and bailable warrants to Mrs. Jamila Singh for procuring her attendence before him on 10. 4. 95. In the mean time, the petitioner got appointed his wife on the post of teacher in Mayo College, Ajmer, of which College Mrs. Jamila Singh was the Principal by wrongfully influencing her. Thus the petitioner failed to maintain absolute integrity, honesty and devotion to duty and got appointment of his wife Mrs. Anuradha Jain on the post of teacher in the Mayo College, Ajmer by wrongfully misusing his office. Annexure -13: (Memo No. 326 dated 16. 2. 2000):-
(3.) HERE again, a departmental enquiry was initiated against the petitioner under Rule 16 of the CC & A Rules. When the petitioner was posted as Civil Judge (SD) and Chief Judicial Magistrate, Ajmer in 1996, a Civil Miscellaneous Case No. 240/96 was pending in the court of Civil Judge (JD), Ajmer (North ). In this case, an order allotting government accommodation No. 7 temporarily to Vinod Kumar was passed by the then Civil Judge (JD ). On 2. 12. 1996, the petitioner called the Reader of the Court and forced him to write in the order sheet of the aforesaid case dated 30. 11. 96 that the operation of the order is stayed till the next date. The words which were added in the order dated 30. 11. 96 are mentioned in the charge sheet (in Hindi ). Thus he manipulated the proceedings of the aforesaid case by forcing the Reader of the court to make forgery in the order sheet and this act of the petitioner amounts to gross misconduct. Annexure-14 (Memo No. 161 dated 2. 3. 2000):- This memo is related to enquiry against the petitioner under Rule 17 of the CC & A Rules. When the petitioner was posted as Civil Judge (SD) & CJM Ajmer in the year 1996, a meeting was held in the chamber of the District & Sessions Judge, Ajmer on 28. 10. 1996 in the Chairmanship of the Secretary of the Legal Aid Board. The allegations against the petitioner are that without the permission and intimation to the District Judge, he left Ajmer for proceeding to Kishangarh and also took Senior Munsrim with him. The next allegation in this memo is that when the petitioner was asked to take over the charge of the Court of Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate No. 1, Ajmer and to relieve Mr. G. P. Gupta, the then Addl. C. J. M. No. 1, Ajmer immediately, the petitioner flouted the orders of the District Judge. The next allegation is that the petitioner took the file relating to Sessions Case from the court of Miss. Indu Pareek, Addl. Civil Judge (JD) No. 2, Ajmer without her permission. Thus the allegation against the petitioner was that he had been disobedient and not devoted to his duties. He showed scant regard to his superiors and used insulting and indecent language for his superior judicial officers and thereby undermined the prestige of his senior officers. All these acts are of insubordination, indecency, disobedience and thus, amount to gross misconduct. Annexure-15: (Memo No. 277 dated 23. 3. 2000):- This is an enquiry under Rule 17 of the CC& A Rules. The allegation against the petitioner is that when he was posted as Additional District and Sessions Judge, Beawar, District Ajmer in the year 1998, the Registrar General (Vig.), Rajasthan High Court, Jodhpur visited Beawar and inspected the courts situated there at 12. 45 p. m. On that day the petitioner addressed a letter to the Registrar General by making baseless and inappropriate allegations against Shri Sampat Raj Sharma, Registrar General (Vig.) Thus, he had scant regard towards his superior officer, he did not maintain proper restraint in writing confidential letters to his superior officers. He castigated an Hon'ble Judge of the High Court also in writing the aforesaid letter, which amounts to act of insubordination, making wild and irresponsible allegations towards his senior officers and this act of the petitioner amounts to misconduct. Annexure-16: (Memo No. Estt. B. 2 (iii) 77/2000/9555 dated 1. 8. 2000):- ;