The Supreme Court awarded a compensation of Rs 20 lakh to a former judicial officer who was compulsorily retired on corruption allegations which were later found to be incorrect.
The apex court noted the Gujarat High Court held that no corruption charge was made out against the former judicial officer.
A bench of Justices Deepak Gupta and Aniruddha Bose, however, did not agree with the view of the high court which said that since the 53-year-old officer had already been out of job for eight years, he should not be brought back into service after such a long time.
"Once the high court held that the charges had not been proved against the appellant, who was a judicial officer, his honour and dignity required that he should be brought back into the service. We hold that the appellant (officer) has not committed any act unbecoming of a judicial officer," the bench said in its order.
The top court said that he cannot be brought back in service since he has already passed the age of superannuation.
"We are of the considered view that since the appellant (officer) has not worked during all these years and this will lead to another round of litigation to decide what he was earning during this period, in lieu of awarding him back-wages, we direct that a lump-sum amount of Rs 20 lakh be paid to the appellant," the bench said.
It said that the amount be paid to him within six months.
The apex court passed the order while dealing with a plea filed by the former judicial officer, who had joined the service in November 1981, regarding the relief to be granted to him.
From June 1992 to June 1994, he was working as a civil judge and judicial magistrate in Gujarat and corruption allegations were levelled against him alleging that he had granted seven bail orders against the provision of law.
It was also alleged that in a civil case, after granting an ex-parte order, he had vacated the injunction the very next day without notice to the petitioner.
After inquiry, penalty of compulsory retirement was imposed against him.
He thereafter approached the high court, which held that no charge of corruption was made out against him.
Disclaimer: No Business Standard Journalist was involved in creation of this content
You’ve reached your limit of {{free_limit}} free articles this month.
Subscribe now for unlimited access.
Already subscribed? Log in
Subscribe to read the full story →
Smart Quarterly
₹900
3 Months
₹300/Month
Smart Essential
₹2,700
1 Year
₹225/Month
Super Saver
₹3,900
2 Years
₹162/Month
Renews automatically, cancel anytime
Here’s what’s included in our digital subscription plans
Exclusive premium stories online
Over 30 premium stories daily, handpicked by our editors


Complimentary Access to The New York Times
News, Games, Cooking, Audio, Wirecutter & The Athletic
Business Standard Epaper
Digital replica of our daily newspaper — with options to read, save, and share


Curated Newsletters
Insights on markets, finance, politics, tech, and more delivered to your inbox
Market Analysis & Investment Insights
In-depth market analysis & insights with access to The Smart Investor


Archives
Repository of articles and publications dating back to 1997
Ad-free Reading
Uninterrupted reading experience with no advertisements


Seamless Access Across All Devices
Access Business Standard across devices — mobile, tablet, or PC, via web or app
