Judges are at times poor judges of Judges, especially in judicial administration, this case reveals,” observed the Division Bench of the Gujarat High Court comprising Chief Justice K S Radhakrishnan and Justice A S Shah on Friday.

The observation came while setting aside the order of a Disciplinary Committee of the HC to dismiss an Additional Sessions Judge on corruption charges.

In the landmark judgement, the HC not only reinstated the dismissed judge, but also asked the court to pay him Rs 15,000 towards legal expenses incurred by him.

Additional Sessions Judge S J Pathak was suspended in October 1999 while serving in Godhra, on charges of misconduct. A departmental inquiry was initiated against him and he was subsequently served two chargesheets relating to certain accusations against him during his earlier postings in Junagadh and Bharuch. Pathak was accused of granting bail to some people charged with serious offences, allegedly in return for considerations and gratifications.

Following this, the HC appointed another judge, Bela Trivedi, as Enquiry Officer in both the cases against Pathak. In her report, Trivedi concluded that the charges levelled against the judge had not been proved. Trivedi’s report said Pathak had passed various orders in “utter disregard and in ignorance of settled legal position’’.

The report was placed before the Disciplinary Committee consisting Justices B J Shethna and D K Trivedi. But the committee disagreed with the report of the Enquiry Officer and directed the concerned office to issue notice to Pathak to show-cause as to why he should not be dismissed from service.

Later, Pathak was asked to respond to the show-cause notice and directed to present himself before the Disciplinary Committee consisting of Justices N G Nandi and M S Shah. The committee, in 2003, exonerated Pathak of all the charges levelled against him.

The committee’s decision was placed before the Chamber meeting, in which all the judges are expected to appear. In the meeting, it was resolved not to accept the report exonerating Pathak. It was also resolved that the earlier disciplinary committee consisting of Justices Shethna and Trivedi would proceed against Pathak.

Subsequently, the committee headed by Justice Shethna ordered Pathak’s dismissal holding that the charges against him have been proved. The state government dismissed Pathak from service on April 13, 2006. Following this, Pathak challenged his dismissal in the HC.

‘Judges are at times poor judges of Judges’
The Division Bench came down heavily on the procedure followed by the court to dismiss Pathak.

Regarding entrusting the departmental inquiry again to the committee headed by Justice Shethna, the court observed, “…Full court of the HC has committed a serious error in entrusting the Departmental Enquiry again to the Disciplinary Committee headed by Justice B J Shethna…when that committee had earlier recorded a clear finding, though, tentative, that all charges levelled against the delinquent officer were established…We fail to see how the HC could again entrust the enquiry to the same Disciplinary Committee, especially in the wake of a contrary report.”

It further observed: “The procedure followed by the HC, in our view, is illegal, arbitrary and violative of the principles of natural justice… .”

Calling the decision taken in the Chamber meeting to entrust the inquiry again to the committee headed by Justice Shethna as lacking ‘application of mind’, the DB observed: “Larger the committee, lesser the application of mind, which is a hard reality… at times, too much view and opinions take the House from the real issue and leads to unchartered areas just like the present case.”