
The Supreme Court of India has asked the Madhya Pradesh High Court to re-evaluate its decision to terminate the services of six women civil judges. The directive was issued in response to concerns regarding the fairness of the termination process and the circumstances under which the probationary performance of these judges was assessed.
Background of the Termination
The six women judges, Sarita Chaudhary, Priya Sharma, Rachna Atulkar Joshi, Aditi Kumar Sharma, Sonakshi Joshi, and Jyoti Barkhade, were dismissed in June 2023 after the Madhya Pradesh High Court recommended their termination. The recommendation was based on an assessment that found their performance during the probation period to be unsatisfactory. This recommendation was subsequently acted upon by the State Law Department.
Supreme Court’s Intervention
The Supreme Court took suo motu cognizance of the matter, highlighting potential issues with the evaluation process, particularly considering that a significant part of the probation period coincided with the COVID-19 pandemic, which may have impacted the judges’ performance assessments. The apex court emphasized the need for a fair re-evaluation of the circumstances surrounding their termination.
Legal and Social Implications
This directive from the Supreme Court underscores the importance of due process and fair evaluation in judicial appointments and terminations. It also highlights the judiciary’s role in ensuring that administrative actions do not undermine the careers of judicial officers, especially under exceptional circumstances like a global pandemic.
The Supreme Court has given the Madhya Pradesh High Court three weeks to reconsider the decision, reflecting the urgency and significance of the issue. This move is seen as a step towards ensuring that the judicial processes and decisions are transparent, fair, and just.
This case also brings to light broader issues related to the treatment of women in the judiciary and the need for supportive measures to ensure their retention and success in the legal profession. The outcome of this re-evaluation will be closely watched as it could set a precedent for handling similar cases in the future.