The Supreme Court said on Thursday that whenever a judicial officer having good track record tenders resignation, an attempt should be made by senior judges of high courts to advise and persuade them to withdraw it.
The top court observed while ordering reinstatement of a former Madhya Pradesh woman judicial officer, who resigned in 2014 following an inquiry into her allegations of sexual harassment against a high court judge, saying her resignation cannot be construed to be voluntary.
"In some High Courts, a practice is followed that whenever a judicial officer having good track record tenders his/her resignation, an attempt is made by the senior judges of the High Court to counsel and persuade him/her to withdraw the resignation. Valuable time and money are spent on training a judicial officer.
"Losing a good Judicial Officer without counselling him/her and without giving him/her an opportunity to introspect and rethink, will not be in the interest of either the Judicial Officer or the Judiciary. We find that it will be in the interest of the judiciary that such a practice is followed by all the High Courts," a bench of Justices L Nageswara Rao and B R Gavai said.
The top court also stated that a judicial officer while discharging his/her duties is expected to be independent, fearless, impassionate and not impulsive.
"But a judicial officer is also a human being. A judicial officer is also a parent. He/she could be a father or a mother. The question would be, whether a judicial officer, while taking a decision in his/her personal matter as a human being, in his/her capacity of a father or mother, would be required to be guided by the same yardsticks," the bench said.
The apex court set aside the order to accept the resignation of the former woman judicial officer and directed the Madhya Pradesh High Court to reinstate her as an additional district judge.
The bench reiterated that it has decided the present matter only based on the peculiar facts and circumstances, as are found in the present matter.
"We do hope that in future, similar facts would never arise for consideration, at least in a lis between a High Court and a judicial officer. However, we may remind ourselves of the dictum that law is supreme and no one is above law. It would be apt to reproduce the words of Thomas Fuller, which have been quoted by Lord Denning, 'Be ye never so high, the law is above you'," the bench said.
The apex court also termed as "totally uncalled for", the submission of Solicitor General Tushar Mehta that if the apex court holds the resignation of the woman to be actuated by coercion, it will have far-reaching implications and will open floodgates to the similarly situated judicial officers.
"We find the said submissions to be uncalled for. At the outset, we have clarified that we are only examining the correctness and otherwise of the order of transfer, the rejection of the representations and the question as to whether the resignation in the facts of the present case, could be construed to be voluntary or not.
"We have not at all gone into the question, regarding the correctness or otherwise of the decisions of the Full Court of the MP High Court with regard to the rejection of the petitioner's representation," the bench said.
With PTI inputs.
