news details |
|
|
| SC to hear petition of Shakti Gupta's removal after vacation | | | Early Times Report
Jammu/New Delhi, May 7: Justice T S Thakur presiding over a Supreme Court bench today expressed his inability to hear a petition of Shakti Gupta, Principal District & Sessions Judge, Kargil (J&K) against his illegal, unconstitutional and mala fide removal by ordering his premature retirement by the full bench of the J&K High Court in June 2013.
Justice T.S. Thakur told Prof Bhim Singh, Senior Advocate representing Shakti Gupta that he (T S Thakur) cannot hear the matter as he knows one of the judicial members personally.
On the request of Prof.Bhim Singh Justice TS Thakur directed the registry to list the matter after vacation before an appropriate bench. The Supreme Court shall reopen after vacation on 30th June, 2014.
The petitioner Shakti Gupta has challenged the validity of the order of J&K Govt based on the recommendation of the full bench of J&K High Court dated 11/06/2013 as communicated to Shakti Gupta and two other District & Sessions Judges namely, Muzaffar Iqbal Qureshi and Brij Mohan Gupta.
The petitioner has taken the plea that Rule 24 of the J&K High Court has been violated as the petitioner was running 57+ years of age whereas Rule 24 applies for premature retirement after the assessment of their performance at the age 50, 55 & 58.
It has also been submitted that J&K Govt has failed to satisfy the inquiries made by the J&K Governor had stressed on this point in his letter addressed to the High Court, "(a)(i) As per Rule (24) of the Jammu and Kashmir Higher Judicial Services Rules, 2009."
The petition has said that prominent issues arising out of the present case are violation of procedure and discrimination. Another important issue involving is the premature retirement with retrospective fact. The order of retirement was issued on 01/01/2014 when the petitioner had attained the age of 57+. The petitioner also supported this fact that there could be no justification for retrospective dismissal or retirement as per law laid down by the Supreme Court of India in latest case in Sukhdev Singh (2013) 9 SC 566 .
Alleging strong mala fide against him by some senior judges of the High Court, the petitioner said, "this fact has been illustrated in the petitioner that the High Court had issued the letter to the J&K Govt on 11/06/2013 regarding the compulsory retirement of the petitioner and other two judges namely, Muzaffar Iqbal Qureshi and Brij Mohan Gupta whereas the so-called resolution by the full bench was cleared on 03/06/2013. According to Prof Bhim Singh the terms used by the High Court are highly objectionable, insulting and this is not a premature retirement but punishment unknown in the jurisprudence of law and amount to massacre of the principles of natural justice.
Prof Bhim Singh was assisted by DK Garg, Advocate-on-Record. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
 |
|
|
