1988 (5) TMI 363 - SC - Indian Laws

Summary

Issues:
Whether the appellant, a retired member of the Higher Judicial Service, was entitled to the super-time scale.

Analysis:
The judgment revolves around the entitlement of the appellant, a retired District and Sessions Judge, to the super-time scale. Initially recommended for the selection grade and later for the super-time scale, the appellant faced opposition within the Full Court due to allegations made by Administrative Judges, particularly one by Dhaon, J. The Chief Justice found these allegations baseless and praised the appellant's integrity and competence. The Division Bench of the High Court quashed the Full Court's decision and directed reconsideration, emphasizing the imminent retirement of the appellant in February 1988.

Upon appeal to the Supreme Court, it was noted that the Full Court, in rejecting the super-time scale recommendation, had not provided a fair opportunity for the appellant to address the allegations against him. The Court emphasized that decisions regarding judicial service members' grades fall under the High Court's administrative jurisdiction, subject to exceptions of rule violations or lack of natural justice principles. The Court found the Full Court's actions unjustified in relying on unproven allegations and disregarding the Chief Justice's favorable assessment.

Further, the Court highlighted the violation of procedural rules in communicating adverse remarks to the appellant without Chief Justice's concurrence, as required by Rule 4(B). Instances of baseless accusations, such as involvement in smuggling, were debunked by official records. Considering these factors, the Supreme Court concluded that the appellant was entitled to the super-time scale. The judgment modified the Division Bench's decision, ordering the appellant's monetary benefits from January 1, 1987, and pension adjustments within two months from the judgment date.

In conclusion, the Supreme Court allowed the appeal, granting the appellant the super-time scale benefits post-retirement, emphasizing the importance of procedural fairness, rule adherence, and substantiated allegations in judicial service grade determinations.