In Brief
A judicial officer's termination during probation was challenged before the Supreme Court via writ petition. The High Court (Full Court administratively) had decided not to confirm the officer's appointment due to allegations of misdemeanor and corruption during the probation period. The Supreme Court clarified that while a High Court has limited writ jurisdiction to review such administrative decisions and must defer to the Full Court's collective wisdom, it may intervene if the real motive was punitive rather than evaluative. Here, since the order rested on a holistic assessment of the officer's service record—the proper purpose of probation—and was not disguised punishment, the Court upheld the termination but allowed the appeal on procedural grounds.
The lawyer headnote and full judgment text are available to registered users.