High Court Has Absolute & Exclusive Disciplinary Control Over District Judiciary Under Article 235 : J&K&L High Court
Live LawThe Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court recently held that control over the District Judiciary vested in the High Court in Article 235 of the Constitution of India is complete and absolute and provided only to ensure the independence of the judiciary and to achieve effective separation of powers. A Division Bench of Chief Justice Pankaj Mithal and Justice Sanjeev Kumar held that, "The 'control' vested in the High Court, inter alia, extends to the maintenance of discipline in judicial service which in turn would mean vesting all disciplinary powers in the High Court." At the outset, the High Court referred to T.R.Parihar vs. State of Jammu and Kashmir and ors, 1986 KLJ 187, where it was held that the High Court has the exclusive and absolute control over the subordinate judiciary in the matter of disciplinary proceedings and it is the High Court alone, to the exclusion of all other authorities, which can initiate disciplinary proceedings against the members of the subordinate judiciary including District and Sessions Judges, suspend them pending the enquiry and impose punishment on them, other than the punishment of dismissal, removal or reduction in rank The power is drawn from Article 235 of the Constitution. So far as Petitioner's contention regarding application of the 1956 Rules is concerned, the Court held, "Indisputably, our High Court, though empowered, has not framed its separate disciplinary rules pertaining to the District Judiciary and has been conventionally applying the Rules of 1956 which are generally meant for and applicable to the civil services of the State.Rule 34 when construed in the light of Article 234 of Constitution of India would postulate that the High Court being an absolute and exclusive disciplinary authority is competent to issue show cause notice of proposed penalty to the judicial officer subordinate to it."