SC rejects Haryana judge’s petition against compulsory retirement

Tribune News Service
New Delhi, August 3

The Supreme Court has rejected a Haryana Additional Sessions Judge’s petition challenging a Full Court decision of the Punjab and Haryana High Court recommending his compulsory retirement from service from immediate effect for multiple unexplained bank transactions that went against judicial ethics.

“Considering the facts and circumstances on record and in view of the record indicating that there were multiple transactions showing deposits and withdrawals of substantial amounts of money, it cannot be said that the Full Court was not justified in taking the view that it did. We do not find any reason to take a different view in the matter,” a Bench led by Justice UU Lalit said in an order on Monday.

Additional Sessions Judge Rajinder Goel had challenged the December 14, 2020, recommendation of the Full Court of the Punjab and High Court recommending his compulsory retirement and the consequential order dated January 5, 2021 of the Haryana Governor accepting the Full Court’s recommendation.

The Bench had advised Goel to approach the high court first but his counsel said he wanted to pursue his remedies before the top court. Later, he changed his mind but the Bench refused to allow him to go back to the high court, saying it had already reserved the judgement.

The petitioner joined Haryana Judicial Services on February 16, 1996 and was promoted in 2008 to the Haryana Superior Judicial Services. Pursuant to certain complaints made against him, including one made by the Bar Association, an enquiry was conducted and he was asked to furnish statements regarding his bank accounts and property for the years 2006 to 2009.

A preliminary report dated April 21, 2011, found that there was no documentary evidence regarding allegations of land purchases. It was, however, observed that there were “heavy unexplained bank transactions”.

The report was reviewed by the Administrative Committee of the High Court on August 3, 2011, which decided to initiate disciplinary proceedings against the petitioner and recommended that the petitioner be put under suspension.

On August 5, 2011, the Full Court ordered that the Vigilance/Disciplinary Committee proceedings be initiated against the petitioner and that the petitioner be suspended till the proceedings were concluded.

The Inquiring Authority in its report dated May 23, 2016, found Goel guilty of unexplained transactions. Accordingly, a show cause notice was issued to the petitioner on August 29, 2016. The Vigilance/Disciplinary Committee of the High Court found that the charges against him were not proved and recommended that he be cleared of all the charges.

However, the Full Court of the High Court on February 4, 2019, decided to send the matter back to the Vigilance/Disciplinary Committee to scrutinize the property statements of the petitioner. The Vigilance/Disciplinary Committee exonerated him again. But the Full Court chose to reject both the reports and recommend his compulsory retirement. The top court accepted the Full Court’s decision.