(1.) BY means of the present writ petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner, Desh Bhushan Jain, seeks the following reliefs :
(2.) BRIEFLY stated, the facts giving rise to the present petition are as follows : Facts of the case : According to the petitioner, after obtaining degree in law, the petitioner started practising in the field of law. The Allahabad High Court conducted selections in the year 1995-96 for the Higher Judicial Service. The petitioner also applied and he was selected and appointed directly on 3.8.1996 as a Higher Judicial Service Officer. His first place of posting was at Moradabad as Additional District and Sessions Judge wherein he remained posted upto 5.6.2000. He was transferred to Farrukhabad and joined there on 7.6.2000. However, subsequently he was posted at Nainital where he joined on 9.6.2000. He remained posted there till 2.9.2001 when he was transferred to Saharanpur where he remained posted from 4.9.2001 to 17.11.2003. Thereafter, he was posted as Special Judge, SC and ST, at Basti, which post he held from 19.11.2003 to 6.6.2005. He was appointed as Additional District and Sessions Judge, Court No. 1, Basti from 6.6.2005, which post he held till the filing of the present petition.
(3.) IT appears that the representation preferred by the petitioner against the adverse remarks reported by the District Judge, Saharanpur, was not specifically disposed of by the Administrative Judge and had, therefore, remained pending. The repr?sentation was placed before the Administrative committee. The administrative Committee, in its meeting held on 6.4.2005, had been pleased to reject the said representation, which order was communicated to the petitioner vide letter dated 29.4.2005. The order of the Administrative Committee, as communicated to the petitioner is reproduced below : "The remarks of the District Judge be restored. The overall assessment of good and certificate of integrity given by then Hon'ble Administrative Judge is overruled by the Administrative Committee. The representation of the officer is thus rejected."