‘You Don’t Allow Lawyers To Argue’ : SC Declines Former DRT Chandigarh Judge’s Plea Against Extension Of Suspension

Supreme Court of India

The Supreme Court on Friday dismissed a petition filed by former Presiding Officer of the Debts Recovery Tribunal, Chandigarh, M.M. Dhonchak, challenging the extension of his suspension.

A bench of Justices Vikram Nath and Sandeep Mehta, while hearing the matter, rejected the arguments advanced by Dhonchak’s counsel that he was a highly efficient officer with 35 years of service and one of the best disposal records.

Justice Mehta observed, “On the face of the record, he does not want advocates to present cases. He can just put them under a lawnmower… Where is the statutory right to stick to the post? Inquiry is still underway.”

Justice Nath added sarcastically, “That’s the best. If you don’t have lawyers, you can dispose of all cases every day! You don’t allow the lawyers to argue.”

Allegations & Government Stand

Earlier, Dhonchak approached the Punjab and Haryana High Court, alleging that false complaints were lodged against him by lawyers only because he refused to “accommodate” them. He claimed he was being penalized for working diligently and professionally.

The Centre, however, countered that his suspension was based on verifiable complaints, including written submissions from the DRT Bar Association, reports of his conduct, and administrative notings indicating behavior unbecoming of a judicial officer. It stressed that continuation in service was not his right, especially when disciplinary proceedings were pending.

Court’s Findings

Both a Single Bench and a Division Bench of the High Court had earlier upheld the government’s decision to extend his suspension. The Division Bench noted that the charges against him were “grave” and his conduct had drawn “scathing remarks” in several High Court orders.

It held, “Tested on principles governing judicial scrutiny of suspension orders, no fault can be found in the decision to extend the suspension.”

The court further directed that the competent authority should ensure litigants are not inconvenienced due to Dhonchak’s suspension and that the DRT continues to function effectively.