"In this respect, it is submitted that the procedure of recording of ACRs being following by the Delhi High Court is as follows:-
(a) Annual Confidential reports of all the Judicial Officers are recorded by the Full Court of the High Court on a calendar year basis, at the end of the Calendar year:
(b) Groups of the Judicial Officers of subordinate Courts are placed under the direct supervision and control of individual Hon'ble Judges of the High Court for the purposes of inspection;
(c) The Hon'ble Inspecting Judges call for and assess the monthly disposal of Judicial Officers and also carry out inspection of the Courts of Officers allotted to them. They may also call for judgments from the particular Officers for perusal. Complaints, if any received against the Judicial officers are also placed before the Hon'ble Inspecting Judges and the Hon'ble Judges, after perusal of the complaints, depending upon the nature and merits of the allegation, some times, call for judicial files of the cases to which the complaints are related and pass appropriate orders on the administrative side;
(d) The Hon'ble Inspecting Judges, thereafter, give their Inspection Reports/ Confidential remarks on the working of the Officers concerned, on the proforma prescribed containing columns as mentioned therein; and
(e) At the time of recording of ACRs by the Full Court, the reports of the District and Sessions Judge, if any given, the Inspection, Report of the Hon'ble Inspecting Judge, if made, ummary of monthly disposal of the Officer and a precis of previous 5 years ACRs are placed before the Full Court for its consid eration for the recordings of the ACRs of the Judicial Officers. he personal files and complaint files, it called for, are also placed before the Full Court."
Form to be used in the case of District/Additional District & Sessions Judges/Subordinate Judge/Rent/Additional Rent Controllers/Metropolitan Magistrates).
HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Confidential remarks by the Hon'ble Inspecting Judge on the work of Shri P.D. Gupta. DJS FOR THE YEAR 1993.
1. Knowledge of law and procedure Good 2. Is he industrious and prompt in the disposal of cases and Yes has he coped effectually with heavy work? 3. Are his judgments and orders Yes well written and clearly expressed? 4. (For District and Sessions Judges and Senior Subordinate Judges) Is his supervision and the distribution of business among, and his control over the Subordinate Courts good? 5. Is he an efficient Judicial Yes he is good Officer? officer. 6. Has he maintained Judicial Nothing adverse reputation for honesty and has to come my impartiality? notice. 7. Net result. B+(Good)"
HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Confidential remarks by the Hon'ble Inspecting Judge on the work of Shri P.D. Gupta, Addl Sr Civil Judge, Tis Hazari FOR THE YEAR 1994.
1. Knowledge of law and procedure Reasonably good 2. Is he industrious and prompt in the disposal of cases and Yes has he coped effectually with heavy work? 3. Are his judgments and orders Yes well written and clearly expressed? 4. (For District and Sessions Judges and Senior Subordinate Judges) Is his supervision and the distribution of business among, and his control over the Subordinate Courts good? 5. Is he an efficient Judicial Yes Officer? 6. Has he maintained Judicial Nothing adverse reputation for honesty and came to notice impartiality? 7. Net result. B+
Form to be used in the case of District/Additional District & Sessions Judges/Subordinate Judges/Rent/Additional Rent Controllers/Metropolitan Magistrates).HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Confidential remarks by the Hon'ble Inspecting Judge on the work of Shri P.D. Gupta, DJS FOR THE YEAR 1995 1. Knowledge of law and procedure Good 2. Is he industrious and prompt Yes in the disposal of cases and has he coped effectually with heavy work? 3. Are his judgments and orders well written and clearly Yes expressed? 4. (For District and Sessions Judges and Senior Subordinate Judges) Is his supervision and the distribution of business among, and his control over the Subordinate Courts good? 5. Is he an efficient Judicial Yes Officer? 6. Has he maintained Judicial reputation for honesty and impartiality? 7. Net result.The representations of Judicial Officers were considered by us in the meetings held on 6.2.97, 6.3.97, 14.5.97, 21.7.97 and 22.7.97. We have perused the personal files, complaint files, ACR files and also judgments of some of the officers. Some discrete enquiries were also made by us. Having fully considered and examined the matter, our recommendations on the representations are as follows:S. Particulars of the Representation (s) No. Representation (s) Deserve/Deserves to be: 1. Two representation dated Rejected nil of Mr. Ravi Kumar, Addl. District & Sessions Judge, Delhi, for upgra- dation of ACRs recorded on his work and conduct for the years 1994 and 1995. 2. Representation dt. 12.7.96 Rejected of Mr. Prithvi Raj, a Member of Delhi Higher Judicial Service for expunction of adverse remarks recorded in his confidential report for the year 1994-95. 3. Application dated 16.7.96 Rejected of Mr. G.S. Jugti, a member of Delhi Higher Judicial Service for giving him full particulars on the basis of which remarks 'C' have been recorded on his work and conduct for the year 1995. 4. Representation dated 15.7.96 Rejected of Mr. Sunil Gaur, a member of Delhi Higher Judicial Service for reconsideration of his Annual Confidential Report for the year 1995 and giving him better grade. 5. Representation dated Accepted. The 10.7.96 of Mr. P.S. Teji, a officer deserves member of Delhi Higher Judicial to be graded as Service for expunction of 'B' (Average). adverse remarks recorded in However, the his ACR for the year 1995. work and conduct of officer deserves to be observed. 6. Representation dated Rejected. 15.7.96 of Mr. M.S. Rohilla M.M.Shahdara, for expunction of adverse remarks recorded in his ACR for the year 1995 and, if deemed fit, for giving him opportunity to explain personally. 7. Representation dated Rejected 6.7.96 of Mr. D.S. Sidhu, M.M. Tis Hazari for reconsideration/review of adverse remarks recorded in his ACR for the year 1995. 8. Representation dated nil Rejected. of Mr. J.K. Pali, representation dated 11/3/96 of Mr.Jaswant Singh and representation dated 8.3.96 of Mr. Z.S Solanki,Ex-members of Delhi Judicial Service, addressed to the Lt. Governor, Delhi, for review of their cases of premature retirement and for re-instating them in service treating the intervening period of absence as duty and the request of the Govt. of NCT of Delhi contained in their letter No.6/9-96-Judl. /665 dated 22.4.96 for views/ comments of the Hon'ble High Court thereon to enable to submit the case to the Lt. Governor, Delhi, for his consideration. (i) Representation dated 11.7.96 Rejected. of Mr. Ghanshyam Gupta, M.M. New Delhi, for deletion of adverse remarks recorded in his ACR for the Year 1995 and for giving him appropriate gradation and personal hearing. (ii) Representation dated 26.8.96 Rejected. of Mr. Ghanshyam Gupta, against his supersession in the matter of promotion to Delhi Higher Judicial Service and for grant of personal hearing in the matter. (iii)Representation dated 20.9.96 Rejected. of Mr. Ghanshyam Gupta against adverse entries in his ACR for the year 1987-88 to 1991 and for the years 1992 to 1995. 10(i)Representation dated 16.7.96 Rejected. of Mr. Rajesh Kumar, M.M. New Delhi for expunction of adverse remarks recorded in his ACR for the year 1993, grant of promotion from the date of his juniors are promoted with consequential benefits, and upgrading the ACRs recorded on his work and conduct for the years 1994 and 1995 to 'B+' grading. (ii) Representation dated 2.11.96 Rejected. of Mr. Rajesh Kumar, M.M. against his representation in the matter or promotion to Delhi Higher Judicial Service. 11(i) Representation dated 8.7.96 Rejected. of Mr. P.D. Gupta, M.M.,Tis Hazari, for expunction of adverse remarks recorded in his ACR for the years 1994 and 1995. (ii) Representation dated 21.2.97 Rejected. of Mr. P.D. Gupta, MM., Delhi against his supersession in the matter of promotion/appointment to Delhi Higher Judicial Service. 12(i)Application dated 16.7.96 1993-Rejected. of Mr. S.S. Handa, M.M. Tis Hazari for supply of a copy of 1994 and 1995: the reasons, if any recorded at Accepted. the time of recording of his ACRs No remarks need for the years 1993, 1994 and be given for 1995 and a copy of the remarks 1994 and 1995. recorded for these years by the two Hon'ble Inspecting Judges, and for extension of time for making the full and effective representation. (ii) Representation dated 8.1.97 -do- of Mr. S.S. Handa, M.M. Tis Hazari against adverse Annual Confidential remarks recorded on his work and Conduct for the years 1993, 1994 and 1995. 13(i) Representation dated 3.10.96 Rejected. of Mr. A.B. Dateer, an officer of Delhi Judicial Service against recommendation of hon'ble High Court of the names of five officers of Delhi Judicial Service, who are Junior to him, for promotion to Delhi Higher Judicial Service. (ii) Representation dated 27.11.96 Rejected. of Mr. A.S. Dateer, an officer of Delhi Judicial Service against adverse Annual Confidential Remarks recorded on his work and conduct for the year 1995. 14. Representation dated 27.9.96 Since proposed of Mr. A.K. Chaturvedi, chargesheet an officer of Delhi against the Judicial Service who has officer is been placed under suspension coming up for w.e.f. 21.9.96 against the consideration. order of his suspension. before Full Court on 26.7.97 it would be appropriate that the matter of suspension is also taken up by Full Court. 15. Note dated 3.9.96 of Hon'ble The officer should Ms. Justice Usha Mehra in the be warned to be matter regarding inspection note careful in future dated 30.11.95 recorded by and his performance Mr. R.K. Sharma, should be watched by Additional District & Sessions the Incharge Addl. Judge in respect of the court Distt. & Sessions of Mr. Mahavir Singhal,M.M. Tis Judge, who may be Hazari pointing out certain directed to report iregularities in the claims of the matter to the units of disposal charged etc. High Court pursuant to Administrative quarterly with Committee decision regard to work and dated 17.9.1996. conduct of the officer. 16. Representation dated 2.1.97 Accepted and the of Mr. I.C. Tiwari an officer officer deserves of Delhi Higher Judicial to be graded as Service against adverse Annual per the recommen- Confidential Remark recorded on dation of the his work and conduct for the Inspecting Judge. year 1995. 17. Representation dated 6.1.97 Accepted and the of Mr. V.K. Malhotra, an officer officer deserves to of Delhi Higher judicial Service be graded as per against adverse Annual the recommen- Confidential remarks dation of the recorded on his work and Inspecting Judge. conduct for year 1995. 18. Representation dated 9.12.96 Accepted and of Mr. I.C. Tewari and work be representation dated 11.12.96 assigned to of Mr. V.K. Malhotra, officers the officers. of Delhi Higher Judicial Service against withdrawal of judicial work from them. 19. Representation dated 9.12.96 of Rejected. Mr. Shiv Charan, an officer of Delhi Judicial Service for review and upgrading of ACRs recorded on his work and conduct for the year 1995 and for his promotion as Additional District and Sessions Judge."Thereafter, the office put up a notice for compulsory retirement of the appellant under Rule 74 of the Bihar Service Code. That was considered by the Standing Committee on 21.11.1996. The following resolution was adopted:-
"Agenda Declaration To consider the Having considered desirability of taking the entire service action under Rule records of each of 74 of the Bihar Service the following 4 Code against a few officers: officers of the Subordinate Judiciary (XIX-31-96) 1. Sh. Madan Mohan Choudhary Addl. Distt. & Sess. Judge, Madhubani. 2 ............. 3 ............. 4 ............. It is resolved that it is not in the public interest to retain their services any longer and they should, therefore, be retired compulsorily from service under Rule 74(b)(ii) of the Bihar Service Code. The above decision be placed before the meeting of the Full Court, scheduled to be held on 30th November, 1996 as per Rule 3(n) of Chapter-I Part-I of the Rules of the High Court at Patna instead of getting it circulated."On 30.11.1996 the Full Court met. The Resolution of the Standing Committee was approved. The relevant extract of the minutes of the Full Court meeting is as under:-
"Item No. 7:- To consider the decision of the Standing Committee regarding compulsory retirement of Judicial Officers under Rule 74 of the Bihar Service Code, 1952.The decision of the Standing Committee meeting dated 21.11.96 regarding compulsory retirement of the following Judicial Officers under Rule 74(b) of the Bihar Service Code, is considered by the Full Court and the same is approved.
1. Shri Madan Mohan Choudhary, Addl. Distt. & Sessions Judge, Madhubani.
2..............
3...............
4..............
Read https://indiankanoon.org/doc/945314/
Delhi High CourtPurshottam Dass Gupta (Shri) vs Union Of India on 28 May, 1999Equivalent citations: 1999 IVAD Delhi 645, 80 (1999) DLT 230
Comments
Post a Comment