In Brief
A judicial officer challenged his compulsory retirement from the Haryana Superior Judicial Service following findings of unexplained banking transactions (deposits and withdrawals of substantial sums). The Vigilance/Disciplinary Committee had found him not guilty, but the Full Court of the High Court disagreed and recommended compulsory retirement. The Supreme Court held that the Full Court is not bound by a committee's conclusions in disciplinary matters and may independently reach a different view. Where evidence shows multiple irregular transactions, it was justified for the Full Court to impose compulsory retirement under applicable service rules for conduct against judicial ethics. The petition was dismissed.
The lawyer headnote and full judgment text are available to registered users.