New Delhi: The Supreme Court while hearing an appeal, has held that district judges in Madhya Pradesh were free to take disciplinary action against employees with more than two children.
As per Clause (4) of Rule 22 of the Civil Services (Conduct) Rules, a government servant having more than two children shall be deemed to have committed a misconduct if one of them was born on or after January 26, 2001.
A bench led by the Chief Justice S.A. Bobde, Justice A. S. Bopanna and Justice V. Ramasubramanian has modified the Madhya Pradesh High Court’s order, issued on August 7, 2019, which directed district judges not to withhold increments but only censure the employees if they had joined the service before the rule was notified.
Though the apex court did not amend the reduction of penalty by the high court in the nine petitions, it felt the latter had “committed a serious error in issuing general and overarching directions” by restricting the disciplinary action a district judge can take against an employee for violating the service rules.
Senior advocate Ravindra Srivastava, on behalf of the Registrar General, argued that the district judge had issued a well-reasoned order and the HC had in a way annulled the discretionary powers of the district judge through its order.
He argued that the competent authority should be given the freedom to decide the penalty for a violation. The Additional Advocate General Swarupama Chaturvedi of Madhya Pradesh also supported the HC registrar general’s stand.
Read Also: NGT directs Rajasthan Chief Secy to monitor remedial steps at Sambhar Lake
Though the Court accepted the registrar general’s submission in the context of a competent authority’s powers, it supported the HC for reducing the penalty in the nine petitions.
“Having regard to the circumstances of the case, the High Court thought fit to modify the punishment of withholding two increments with cumulative effect into one of censure. We find no reason to interfere with this order of the High Court which is humane and appropriate for dealing with the alleged misconduct,” the bench said.
Read the order here;
44757_2019_31_1_23628_Order_27-Aug-2020-India Legal Bureau