The Supreme Court has directed for the payment of full salary to a civil judge, who was removed for allegedly having illicit relationship with a woman judicial officer.
Setting aside an order passed by the Punjab and Haryana High Court, the Bench of Justice Vikram Nath and Justice Prasanna Bhalachandra Varale observed that since the termination order has been set aside, the Civil judge should be taken back in service and thereafter proceeded with as per the directions.
Hearing a petition filed by Anantdeep Singh, the Apex Court noted that on April 20, 2022, it had asked the full court to reconsider the matter after setting aside the first termination order of 2009.
However, neither the High Court nor by the State reinstated the appellant into service. No decision was made regarding the back wages from the date the termination order had been passed till the date of reinstatement, which should be the date of the judgment of this court, it added.
The Bench directed that the appellant would be entitled to salary from the date of judgment of April 20, 2022 till fresh termination order was passed on April 2, 2024. It also directed for payment of 50 percent of back wages for a period between 2009 and 2022.
The appellant, who had joined Punjab Civil Services (Judicial Branch) in 2006, was terminated before completing three years probation in 2009.
Despite the Apex Court order of 2022, the High Court had resolved to reiterate its earlier decision of 2009, terminating the services of the appellant. During the pendency of the instant plea, the state government passed the order of termination.
The counsel appearing for the appellant contended that the complaint made by his wife and mother-in-law have been found as not credible and truthful with respect to the allegations of the illicit relationship.
Other allegations like use of private car and not residing in official residence could not be believed, noted the lawyer. He said the woman judicial officer has already been reinstated after the Apex Court upheld the High Court’s order disbelieving the charges.
While refusing to go into the merits of contention, the top court of the country granted the appellant liberty to assail the fresh orders passed by the High Court and the state government.