RAJENDRA PRASAD GUPTA Vs. STATE OF U P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner during his service tenure was posted at District Chandauli w.e.f. 1.4.2005 to 22.9.2005 and during this period, he worked as Chief Judicial Magistrate w.e.f. 10.6.2005 to 22:9.2005. vide a communication dated 31.7.2006, District Judge, Chandauli forwarded a copy of the Annual Confidential Remarks of the petitioner recorded for the year 2005-06 to the District Judge, Meerut for being intimated to the petitioner. Several adverse observations against the petitioner were made on his overall assessment of his service profile for the said period. Overall assessment of the petitioner was found 'Poor'. On receipt of the aforesaid communication, the petitioner filed a representation dated 21.8.2006 before the Registrar-General, High Court, Allahabad seeking for expunging the aforesaid remarks. While the aforesaid representation was pending consideration, the petitioner was served with a notice dated 10.10.2006 issued by the High Court on the administrative side calling for an explanation with regard to his disposal of cases being less-than the minimum prescribed standard fixed.

(2.) Another communication was received by the petitioner in this respect regarding the remarks recorded by the Hon'ble Administrative Judge in his Annual Confidential Report. A representation was filed by the petitioner against the said Annual Confidential Report before the High Court. The explanation submitted by the petitioner with regard to the disposal of the cases being less than the minimum standard was found to be incorrect and in this respect a communication was received by the petitioner from the Registrar (Confidential) that his disposal was found to be satisfactory.

(3.) The representations made against expunging of Annual Confidential Report recorded by the District Judge and Hon'ble Administrative Judge were considered by a Committee constituted in this behalf and vide communication dated 6.5.2008 the petitioner was informed that the same have been rejected. Two communications on this behalf were sent by the Registrar (Confidential) to the petitioner. Both these orders are subject-matter of challenge in this writ petition.