Taking Suo Motu Case On Dismissal Of 6 Women Judicial Officers, Supreme Court Issues Notice To Madhya Pradesh High Court
In a suo motu writ petition registered in connection with simultaneous termination of services of 6 female civil judges by the Madhya Pradesh government, the Supreme Court on Friday (January 12) issued notice to the Registrar General of the MP High Court.The Bench of Justices BV Nagarathna and Sanjay Karol passed the order, noting that suo motu cognizance of the matter had already been taken...
In a suo motu writ petition registered in connection with simultaneous termination of services of 6 female civil judges by the Madhya Pradesh government, the Supreme Court on Friday (January 12) issued notice to the Registrar General of the MP High Court.
The Bench of Justices BV Nagarathna and Sanjay Karol passed the order, noting that suo motu cognizance of the matter had already been taken by Chief Justice of India DY Chandrachud, and the same was in the nature of an Article 32 petition.
The case relates to 6 female judges, appointed in Judicial Services of the State of Madhya Pradesh, who were terminated from service last year.
Aggrieved, three of them had written to the top Court on September 2, 2023, alleging that the termination was primarily on account of their disposal not being upto the standards set. The officers had claimed that their services had been terminated in the initial stage of their career, despite the fact that quantitative assessment of their work could not take place due to considerable lapse of time on account of outbreak of Covid-19 pandemic.
Taking cognizance, the court had directed appointment of Advocate Gaurav Agarwal as Amicus Curiae in the matter.
Today, Advocate Agarwal apprised the court that 3 of the former judges have approached the High Court with their grievance, where the matter is pending but has not been taken up as such. It also came up that some of the aggrieved officers had in fact approached the Supreme Court earlier with writ petitions under Article 32, which were ultimately withdrawn.
On Justice Karol remarking in this backdrop that, "we are first to decide whether we should even entertain this, ofcourse...", Senior Advocate Patwalia (appearing for the impleadment applicant) urged that once cognizance is taken, notice has to go to the other side.
The court was further informed that when the writ petitions were filed, and withdrawn to approach the High Court, the aggrieved officers were not aware that the court had taken suo motu cognizance of the matter. Senior Advocate Patwalia and Advocate Agarwal unanimously asserted that there was no way for the officers to know that.
The Bench, after hearing the submissions, issued notice in the suo motu writ petition. The application for impleadment of one of the 6 officers was allowed. As Advocate Rekha Pandey entered appearance for 3 of the officers, notice was directed to be issued to the 2 remaining officers, besides the Registrar General of the MP High Court.
Appearance: Advocate Gaurav Agarwal (Amicus Curiae); Senior Advocate DS Patwalia with Advocate Tanvi Dubey (for intervenor/impleadment applicant); Advocate Dr. Charu Mathur; Advocate Rekha Pandey
Case Title: IN RE: TERMINATION OF CIVIL JUDGE, CLASS-II (JR. DIVISION) MADHYA PRADESH STATE JUDICIAL SERVICE, SMW(C) No. 2/2023