Inquiry can be begun just on evidence if no complaint: HC

Bench dismisses petition of civil judge challenging an order

A departmental inquiry can be initiated against a judicial officer if there is verifiable material to substantiate the allegations, in the absence of a written complaint and an affidavit, the Bombay High Court has said.

A Division Bench of Justices R.M. Savant and S.V. Kotwal on May 4 dismissed a petition filed by a civil judge (junior division), Asif Tahasildar, challenging an order of July 15, 2017, issued by the High Court registrar, initiating a departmental inquiry against him on two charges.

The first charge was for allegedly misusing the official position to cause wrongful gain for oneself and loss to the State exchequer, when Mr. Tahasildar was a civil judge in Jalna district. In the second incident, Mr. Tahasildar allegedly assaulted a person and threatened to imprison him in a false case, when he was a judge in Kolhapur.

The petition claimed that the departmental inquiry, initiated against Mr. Tahalsildar, was in breach of the guidelines issued by the Chief Justice of India, which mandate a written complaint accompanied with a duly-sworn affidavit against a judicial officer before the initiation of an inquiry. In this case, there was no written complaint, the petition said.

The Bench said in both cases, before initiating the inquiry, the principal judges of the courts (Jalna and Kolhapur) had carried out a discreet inquiry and had also taken the petitioner’s reply into consideration.

The HC registrar passed the order initiating a departmental inquiry only after receiving reports from the principal judges concerned. “Hence, so far as the inquiry against the petitioner is concerned, there is verifiable material to substantiate the allegations made,” the court said.

It is, therefore, not possible to accept the petitioner’s contention that in the absence of a written complaint accompanied by a duly-sworn affidavit, no departmental inquiry can be initiated, the court said.

The court also refused to accept the petitioner’s argument that when he was issued a show cause notice, his side of the story was not heard or taken into consideration. “The disciplinary authority is under no obligation at the stage of issuing a show cause notice to afford any opportunity of hearing to a delinquent,” the HC said.

“The disciplinary authority has to only consider whether there are grounds for proceeding with an inquiry so as to ascertain the truth behind the allegations against the judicial officer,” the court said.

Merely because no hearing was afforded prior to the disciplinary authority coming to a conclusion to proceed departmentally against the petitioner, does not mean that the principles of natural justice have been violated, the Bench said.

The petitioner can participate in the departmental inquiry against him and refute or dispel the charges, the HC said.