M.MANASA Vs. STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The present writ petition has been instituted, under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, assailing order, dtd. 10/8/2018, passed by 2nd respondent placing petitioner under suspension and further G.O. Ms.No.203, Law (L & LA AND JUSTICE, HOME.COURTS-A) Department, dtd. 28/12/2018, issued by 1st respondent discharging her from service as she stated to have been found to be unsuitable to hold the post of Additional Junior Civil Judge (Probationer), as illegal, arbitrary and violative of Articles 14, 19, 21 and 311 of the Constitution of India, and consequently, to set aside the same and to extend all consequential benefits.

(2.) The facts of the case, in brief, are as follows:

(3.) (a) The 2nd respondent filed counter-affidavit trying to justify the order of discharge. It has been stated that based on suo motu report of the Director, A.P. Judicial Academy, who highlighted the occurrence of incidents stated supra, the matter was placed before the President, A.P. Judicial Academy, who has, in turn, endorsed that the reported behaviour of the two officers since being highly objectionable, to place the same before the Hon'ble Patron-in-Chief. Thereafter, the matter was placed before the Administrative Committee of the Hon'ble Judges and in the meeting held on 9/8/2018, the Committee had resolved to place both officers under suspension and the Registry to take steps for issuance of memo calling for explanation as to why their probation should not be terminated and discharged from further training. (b) Consequently, order of suspension, dtd. 10/8/2018, came to be passed, and also show-cause notice, dtd. 20/8/2018, was issued calling for explanation in that regard. The explanation offered by the petitioner was eventually placed before the Administrative Committee of the Hon'ble Judges, and in the meeting held on 5/11/2018, the Committee, having regard to the officers demeanour and conduct, decided that they were not suitable to the post to which they were appointed and, therefore, resolved to discharge them. The recommendation was accordingly made to the 1st respondent for issuance of necessary orders, and thereby impugned G.O., dtd. 28/12/2018, has been issued discharging petitioner from service. The action that was recommended by the Hon'ble Administrative Committee and approved by the Hon'ble Full Court, was in peculiar circumstances as stated supra, as they were found to be unsuitable to hold the post, hence, prayed for dismissal of writ petition.