Contradictions In Eyewitness Accounts And Suppression Of Crucial Evidence Weaken The Prosecution's Case: Telangana High Court High Court of Sikkim Sets Aside Trial Court’s Decision on Maintainability of Suit: Preliminary Issues Must Be Purely of Law Courts Must Focus on Substance Over Procedure, Says High Court Writ Petitions Against Civil Court Orders Must Be Under Article 227: Patna High Court Reiterates Jurisdictional Boundaries Kerala High Court Upholds Eviction, Rejects Sub-Tenant's Kudikidappu Claim Contractual Employment Does Not Confer Right to Regularization: Jharkhand High Court Divorced Wife Entitled to Maintenance Under Domestic Violence Act for Past Domestic Violence: Bombay High Court Tenants Cannot Prescribe How Landlords Utilize Their Property: Delhi High Court Validates Eviction Labour Commissioner to Decide Petitioner’s Date of Birth Claim within Three Months, Ensuring Proper Verification and Consideration of Evidence: Uttarakhand High Court Concealment of Health Condition and False Allegations Amount to Cruelty: Gujarat High Court Upholds Divorce Decree Possession Implies Constructive Notice: Duty to Inquire Rests on Subsequent Purchasers: Supreme Court Clarifies Bona Fide Purchase Standards Judicial Proceedings Cannot Be Instituted After Four Years: MP High Court in Quashing FIR Against Retired Engineer Orissa High Court Invalidates Lecturer Recruitment Advertisements for Non-Compliance with UGC Standards Public Interest Jurisdiction Not a Substitute for Private Litigation: Karnataka High Court Declines PIL Cognizance under Section 188 IPC is illegal without a public servant’s complaint:Kerala High Court Juvenile Justice Act Prevails Over Recruitment Rules: Madras High Court Rules Juvenile Records Cannot Bar Employment in Police Services" Calcutta High Court Quashes MR Distributorship Selection Due to Irregularities in Godown Compliance and Selection Process Once the driver has established the validity of his license, the insurer cannot escape liability without conclusive proof to the contrary: J&K HC Belated Claims Cannot Be Entertained: Kerala High Court Overturns CAT Decision on Date of Birth Correction DNA Tests Cannot Supersede Established Legal Presumptions: Himachal Pradesh HC Section 26E of SARFAESI Act Overrides VAT Act: Secured Creditor's Charge Has Priority Over State's Tax Dues: Gujrat High Court High Court of Delhi Clarifies Jurisdiction in Commercial Dispute: 'Procedural Efficiency Must Be Upheld Power Under Section 319 CrPC Cannot Be Exercised Without Prima Facie Case Beyond Contradictions: Supreme Court Motive Alone Insufficient for Conviction Without Corroboration: Supreme Court Supreme Court Ensures Equal Financial Benefits for All High Court Judges: Discrimination Based on Recruitment Source Struck Down Andhra Pradesh High Court Acquits Four Accused: Cites Contradictory Dying Declarations and Lack of Independent Evidence in Murder Case Evidence Corroborates Violent Robbery and Recovery of Stolen Articles: Calcutta High Court Upholds Conviction in Burrabazar Dacoity Case Failure to Implead Contesting Candidates is Fatal; Fundamental Defect Cannot Be Cured: Bombay High Court Dismisses Election Petition Magistrate Not Functus Officio Post-Final Order in Maintenance Cases: Allahabad High Court Substantial Questions of Law a Must in Second Appeals, Reiterates Andhra Pradesh High Court Inconsistencies and Procedural Lapses: Allahabad High Court Acquits Four in Neeta Singh Murder Case

Termination of Judicial Officer - Acts of Insubordination and Non-Compliance During Probation Justify Termination – P&H High Court

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


The High Court of Punjab and Haryana, in a significant ruling, has upheld the termination of a judicial officer for acts of insubordination and suppression of material facts. The Court emphasized that the conduct of a judicial officer during the probation period is crucial for confirmation of service, and any deviation from expected standards cannot be overlooked.

The case revolved around the petitioner, Abhinav Kiran Sekhon, who challenged the termination of his service during the probationary period as a Civil Judge (Junior Division). The termination was based on allegations of insubordination, unauthorized overseas travel, and suppression of material facts from the High Court.

The petitioner contended that his service should have been automatically confirmed post the maximum probation period and that the termination was arbitrary, violating principles of natural justice.

The Court, in its detailed assessment, categorically stated, "the scope of interference in judicial review is extremely limited, and the Court has to review only the ‘decision making process’ and not the ‘decision’ itself." It observed that the acts of the petitioner demonstrated a blatant disregard for the procedural norms and guidelines, thereby rendering him unsuitable for continuation in service.

Justice Lapita Banerji noted, "An officer who repeatedly committed acts of insubordination/suppression during the period of probation would continue with such acts and inappropriate behavior unabated after confirmation, setting a bad example for the other judicial officers."

The writ petition was dismissed, and the termination of service was upheld. The Court's decision underscored the necessity for judicial officers to exhibit conduct befitting their role and highlighted the limited scope of judicial review in administrative decisions concerning judicial service.

Date of Decision: February 29, 2024

Abhinav Kiran Sekhon vs State of Punjab and Another

Similar News