The Gujarat High Court has upheld the termination of a Judicial Magistrate who went on unauthorized leave after sending an "imprudent" letter to the administrative judge of the Gujarat High Court and the Principal District Judge of Vadodara in 2013. In a Writ Petition, the Magistrate challenged the High Court's administrative side order recommending dismissal and the subsequent dismissal order by the State Government.

The Magistrate wrote a letter to the District Judge, triggering a series of events. The letter raised complaints against the President of the District Bar Association for an unjustified strike, violating the Apex Court's decision. The Magistrate expressed an opinion in the letter that the entire judicial system was deteriorating due to certain elements in the Bar. He accused the administrative judge of the High Court and the Principal District Judge of indirectly contributing to the destruction of the judicial system. The Magistrate informed the Principal District Judge that he would not report for duty until the issue was resolved. Following due procedure, the High Court recommended the Magistrate's dismissal from service.

The Magistrate argued before the High Court that the letter did not contain any intemperate or undignified language and, therefore, should not have led to a charge sheet. He claimed that his intention was to uphold the dignity of judicial institutions by urging the District Judge to resolve the issue before he would resume duty. The Magistrate cited a Supreme Court judgment (K.P. Tiwari vs. State of Madhya Pradesh [AIR 1994 SC 1031]), emphasizing the psychological pressure faced by lower judiciary officers and the need for understanding errors without attributing improper motives.

On the other hand, the Registrar General of the High Court contended that the dismissal penalty was justified, citing the Magistrate's history of using intemperate language and making baseless allegations in past letters. It was argued that the Magistrate's decision to abandon duties amounted to going on strike, which was highly unbecoming of a judicial officer.

After considering the arguments, the bench of Justice Biren Vaishnav and Justice Nisha M. Thakore, upheld the termination, stating that the Magistrate's behavior was inappropriate for a judicial officer. The court emphasized that different standards should be applied to a Judicial Officer abandoning service, as compared to an ordinary employee taking unauthorized leave. The court agreed with the committee's report on the administrative side, stating that such conduct was not befitting a Judicial Officer. The court also highlighted the inquiry officer's observation that the Magistrate, as a judicial officer, should have exercised restraint and avoided intemperate language in the letter.

In conclusion, the High Court held that the dismissal order was just and proper, and there was no need for interference in the petition.

Case: Nileshbhai Khusalbhai Chauhan v. Registrar General & 1 Other(s)

R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 4024 of 2016.