Allahabad High Court Reinstates Six Probationary Judicial Officers Dismissed Over 2014 Scuffle, Calls Discharge ‘Stigmatic’
The matter arose after a total of 11 probationary judicial officers were discharged in 2014, followed by the discharge of four more officers in 2015.
The Allahabad High Court has ordered the reinstatement of six probationary judicial officers who were discharged from service in 2014 and 2015 following an altercation among trainee judges at a dinner event in 2014.
The Full Bench of Justice Jaspreet Singh, Justice Manish Mathur, and Justice Subhash Vidyarthi held that the discharge orders were stigmatic and required a proper inquiry before being passed.
"The order of discharge of services of petitioners as probationer are clearly stigmatic which required inquiry prior to discharge from service. Since the order of discharge of service of petitioners is punitive in nature, the maxim of Audi alterm partem was required to be followed prior to their discharge," the Court observed.
The Court quashed the discharge orders dated September 22, 2014, and June 15, 2015, along with the Full Court resolutions of September 15, 2014, and May 23, 2015. It further directed the reinstatement of the petitioners—Sudhir Mishra, Asha Ram Pandey, Akhilesh Kumar Sharma, Ashtosh Tripathi, Mukesh Kumar, and Himanshu Mishra—as probationary judicial officers. Their continuance in service will be subject to confirmation in accordance with applicable rules.
"Consequently, a writ in the nature of Certiorari is issued quashing the impugned orders of discharge dated 22.9.2014 and 15.6.2015 as well as the resolution of Full Court dated 15.9.2014 and 23.5.2015. A further writ in the nature of Mandamus is issued commanding the opposite parties to reinstate the petitioners forthwith as Probationary Judicial Officers on the post held by them prior to passing of the impugned order. Their continuance or otherwise in service shall be subject to their confirmation in service," the Court held.
The matter arose after a total of 11 probationary judicial officers were discharged in 2014, followed by the discharge of four more officers in 2015. The dismissals were based on reports submitted by the Senior Registrar (Judicial) and OSD (Inquiry) regarding an altercation involving at least 15 trainee judges, allegedly linked to a female officer undergoing training with them.
The Court observed that the Full Court resolution discharging the officers did not indicate consideration of any performance evaluation or work assessment of the probationers. Instead, the decision was based solely on allegations of misconduct.
The Bench underscored that while judicial officers must maintain unblemished conduct, termination solely on allegations of misconduct without assessing overall performance amounts to a stigmatic discharge. "The aspect that the conduct of a judicial officer should be unblemished goes without saying but at the same time, none of the judgments relied upon by learned counsel for opposite parties indicate any enunciation of law that discharge of a probationary judicial officer or his confirmation can be based solely on the aspect of conduct without adverting to his over all performance during the probation period," the Court said.
Citing relevant precedents, the Court ruled that the termination orders were not mere "discharge simpliciter" but were instead punitive in nature, necessitating a formal inquiry under Article 311(2) of the Constitution.
The Court further held that failure to conduct such an inquiry rendered the orders arbitrary, unreasonable, and violative of Articles 14 and 311(2) of the Constitution. "Since the petitioners' discharge has clearly been held to be stigmatic, it was incumbent upon the opposite parties to have held an inquiry as contemplated under Article 311(2) of Constitution of India. Such a course having not been followed, the impugned orders are clearly arbitrary, unreasonable, and therefore violative of not only Article 311(2) but also of Article 14 of the Constitution of India," the Court said.
Accordingly, the Court allowed the petitions and directed the reinstatement of the discharged officers.
Cause Title: Sudhir Mishra v. State Of U.P. & other connected matters [Neutral Citation No. 2025:AHC-LKO:14635-FB]
Click here to read/download the Judgment
