http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 1 of 3  

PETITIONER: THE STATE OF BIHAR & ORS.

       Vs.

RESPONDENT: SURESH CHANDRA MUKHERJEE

DATE OF JUDGMENT:       02/05/1996

BENCH: VERMA, JAGDISH SARAN (J) BENCH: VERMA, JAGDISH SARAN (J) VENKATASWAMI K. (J)

CITATION:  JT 1996 (5)   639        1996 SCALE  (4)409

ACT:

HEADNOTE:

JUDGMENT:                          O R D E R      Leave granted.      Shri  Amarendra   Sharan,  learned   counsel  for   the respondent  has   filed  a   memorandum  on  behalf  of  the respondent seeking leave to withdraw the writ petition filed by the  respondent in  the High Court, even though that writ petition has been allowed by the High Court, stating in that memo as under :      "1.  The   instant  Special   Leave      Petition is  directed  against  the      Order of the Patna High Court dated      28th  January,   1994  in  C.W.J.C.      No.6878/93. The  Respondent filed a      writ petition  seeking  enforcement      of  certain   benefits  which  were      consistent with the Notification by      which  he   was  appointed   as   a      Presiding Officer of the Industrial      Tribunal.  The  Notification  dated      18th March,  1993  states  that  he      would be  appointed as  a Presiding      Officer of  the Industrial Tribunal      on conditions of re-employment.      2. In  view of  the State  of Bihar      not offering  the conditions of re-      employment   as   stated   in   the      Notification, the  Respondent filed      the  writ  petition  in  which  the      Order under  Appeal has  come to be      passed.      3. The Respondent upon a reflection      of the  matter, consistent with the      high traditions  and dignity of the      office which  he held  as Judge  of      the Patna  High Court,  is  of  the      considered view  that he  need  not

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 2 of 3  

    have approached the High Court as a      petitioner even to seek enforcement      of  what  he  believed  to  be  his      legitimate  right.   Upon   a   re-      consideration of  the  matter,  the      Respondent  craves  leave  of  Your      Lordships to withdraw his petition.      Consistent with  the traditions  of      high office that the Respondent has      held,  the  Respondent  prays  that      Your Lordship  may  be  pleased  to      give this opportunity."      On the  facts and  in the circumstances of this case,We are satisfied that the stand taken by the respondent, who is a retired  Judge of  the Patna  High Court,  is indeed to be commended and that it is consistent with the high traditions and dignity of the high office which he has held.      The facts  of this case do indicate that the Government of Bihar  is responsible  for the  creation of  a  situation which led the respondent to file a writ petition in the High Court in the belief that it was necessary to do so to uphold the dignity of the office which he had held. It is true that such  a   step  taken   by  him  escalated  to  an  unseemly controversy because  of  the  insensitive  approach  of  the Government of  Bihar to  the problem and the manner in which it has  chosen to  contest the  claim. However,  even  after obtaining a  favourable order  from the  High Court  in that writ petition,  the respondent  has  chosen  to  close  this chapter and  withdraw the  writ petition  itself,  which  is sufficient indication  of the  fact that he resorted to that step only  in an  attempt to indicate the honour of the high office of  a High  Court Judge.  It is  unfortunate that the Government of Bihar failed to appreciate that it was, to say the  least,   inappropriate  on   its  part  to  invite  the respondent to  accept an  appointment after  his  retirement under the  impression that  the conditions  thereof would be commensurate with  the dignity  of the  office of  the  High Court Judge  which he  had held,  and then  to have  resiled therefrom causing  needless embarrassment  to the respondent as well  as the  Patna High Court itself. In comparison with the unabated huge wastage of public money even in litigation which is  a common  spectacle, the  tenacity with  which the Government of  Bihar contested this matter, unmindful of the damage it was causing to the image of the superior judiciary of the State, is indeed a matter of deep regret.      We make  these observations  with  the  hope  that  the Government of Bihar will at least now appreciate the correct approach which  is  expected  from  the  executive  in  such matters. It  is also expected that the higher judiciary will take note  of this  incident to  ensure that  no one else is exposed to  a similar  embarrassment in future on account of the insensitivity  of any Government in making such an offer to a retired superior Judge. This incident has thrown up for reflection this  aspect which  is intimately  connected with the independence of judiciary. It is for this reason, we are constrained to  make these  observations while  granting the prayer made  by the  respondent to  permit the withdrawal of his writ petition.      In view  of the  respondent’s prayer  for withdrawal of the writ  petition, the  High Court’s order made there on is set aside  without expressing any opinion on the merits, and the writ petition filed in the High Court is permitted to be withdrawn.      This appeal and the respondent’s writ petition filed in the High Court are disposed of in this manner. No costs.

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 3 of 3