Registrar Has No Power To Cancel Registered Sale Deeds: Madras High Court Reaffirms Civil Court’s Exclusive Jurisdiction MP High Court Refuses to Quash FIR Against Principal of Sacred Heart Convent High School in Forced Conversion Case Employees Of Registered Societies Cannot Claim Article 311 Protection: Delhi High Court Clarifies Limits Of Constitutional Safeguards In Private Employment Maintenance Cannot Be Doubled Without Cogent Reasons, Wife's Education And Earning Capacity Relevant Factors: Gujarat High Court A Foreign Award Must First Be "Recognised" Before It Becomes A Decree: Bombay High Court A Registered Will Does Not Become Genuine Merely Because It Is Registered: Andhra Pradesh High Court Rejects Suspicious Testament Compensation Under Railways Act Requires Proof of Bona Fide Passenger – Mere GRP Entry and Medical Records Cannot Establish ‘Untoward Incident’: Delhi High Court Tenancy Rights Cannot Be Bequeathed By Will: Himachal Pradesh High Court Declares Mutation Based On Tenant’s Will Void Preventive Detention Cannot Be Based On Mere Apprehension of Bail: Delhi High Court Quashes PITNDPS Detention Order Probate Court Alone Has Exclusive Jurisdiction To Decide Validity Of Will – Probate Petition Cannot Be Rejected Merely Because A Civil Suit Is Pending: Allahabad High Court PwD Candidates Cannot Be Denied Appointment After Selection; Authorities Must Accommodate Them In Suitable Posts: Supreme Court Directs SSC And CAG To Appoint Candidates With Disabilities When Registered Partition Deed Exists, Plea Of Prior Oral Partition Cannot Override It:  Madras High Court Dismisses Second Appeal Municipal Bodies Cannot Demand Character Verification Of Residents: Calcutta High Court Strikes Down Surveillance Condition In Building Sanction State Cannot Exploit Contractual Workers For Perennial Work: Punjab & Haryana High Court Grants Pay Parity To PUNBUS Drivers And Conductors Police Inputs Cannot Create New Building Laws: Calcutta High Court Strikes Down Security-Based Conditions Near Nabanna 'Raising A Child As Daughter Does Not Make Her An Adopted Child': Punjab & Haryana High Court Once Leave Under Section 80(2) CPC Is Granted, Prior Notice to Government Is Not Mandatory: Orissa High Court Restores Trial Court Decree State Cannot Use Article 226 To Evade Compliance With Court Orders: Gauhati High Court Dismisses Union’s Petition With Costs ED Officers Accused Of Assault By ₹23-Crore Scam Accused – FIR Survives But Probe Shifted To CBI: Jharkhand High Court High Courts Should Not Interfere In Academic Integrity Proceedings At Preliminary Stage: Kerala High Court Power Of Attorney Holder With Personal Knowledge Can Depose In Cheque Bounce Cases: Kerala High Court Sets Aside Acquittal Agreement Cannot Dissolve Hindu Marriage, But Can Prove Mutual Separation”: J&K & Ladakh High Court Denies Maintenance

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

Latest Legal News