A day after taking serious exception to the inability of the Delhi High Court to back up the ‘bad grading’ of a lower court judge, the Supreme Court on Friday not only quashed the grade but also ordered restoration of consequential benefits due to the judge except for the assessment period.
On Thursday, while expressing dismay over the inadequate assistance by the High Court, the Supreme Court had summoned the Registrar General of the High Court or any of the Registrars of the High Court to appear before it for an explanation. While the High Court was able to produce the records related to the performance of the lower judge concerned on Friday, it was not enough to make the judges change their mind.
The grading, “C” corresponding to ‘integrity doubtful’ rating, was done by the full Court. On contest, a Division Bench of the High Court itself had set aside the grading.
During hearing on Thursday, the HC could not back up the challenge, prompting Justice P.C. Pant to remark, “Show us material on the basis of which the decision was arrived at. During 1997 to 1999, she has good reputation. Suddenly, in 2000 you decide her integrity is doubtful and withdraw judicial work from her.”
Fellow Judge Ranjan Gogoi added, “This is clearly not the way to treat judges. [The] institution is composed of individuals. Keep the institution in mind.”
Contradictory ordersWhen informed that the judge was posted as Additional District judge, Justice Gogoi asked, “If the judge’s integrity is doubtful as you say, then how is she retained? She has not only been retained but also promoted. How can you contradict yourself?” As the proceedings were under way, an official of the HC, who rushed into court, tried to pass some papers to the counsel leading to further rebuke. “Who is he? Why is he here? How can he come like this? Where is the security?” Justice Gogoi asked. The man, a Delhi High Court Registry official, was escorted out of the court.
Towards the end of the arguments, the counsel made a reference to the court’s remarks made on Thursday, to which Justice Gogoi replied, “If the records which were produced today were produced yesterday, we would not have had the occasion to make such observations”.