Supreme court reinstates two dismissed women judges, slams 'punitive, arbitrary' action

In a landmark decision, the Supreme Court of India has overturned the dismissal of two women judicial officers from Madhya Pradesh, branding the action as "punitive, arbitrary, and illegal." The apex court directed their reinstatement within 15 days, underscoring the need for greater sensitivity towards the unique challenges faced by women in the judiciary.

The case stemmed from the June 2023 dismissal of six women civil judges in Madhya Pradesh, following recommendations by the administrative committee of the state's High Court. While four judges were reinstated after Supreme Court intervention in September 2024, the remaining two — Aditi Kumar Sharma and Sarita Chaudhary — continued to be excluded.

A bench comprising Justices BV Nagarathna and NK Singh ruled in favor of their reinstatement with full recognition of their seniority. The court also ordered that their probation dates align with those of their junior counterparts and mandated that their monetary benefits be calculated on a notional basis for pensionary purposes.

Judiciary must show empathy: court

The court emphasized that judicial institutions must acknowledge and accommodate the personal challenges faced by women judges. One of the dismissed officers had suffered a miscarriage, battled Covid-19, and faced family health crises, factors that were ignored while making adverse remarks in her Annual Confidential Report (ACR). The other judge was dismissed without being allowed to respond to a complaint.

"Even after reviewing the sealed cover report from the High Court, we find no grounds to change our stance. This termination was stigmatic and punitive," the bench stated, setting aside the High Court's full bench order, the administrative report, and the subsequent government directive.

‘Need for greater representation and sensitivity in judiciary’

Beyond the specifics of the case, the verdict highlighted the systemic challenges women face in the judicial system. "Greater representation of women in the judiciary enhances the quality of justice and promotes gender equality. However, it is not enough to simply celebrate the increasing number of women judicial officers—we must also ensure a supportive and empathetic work environment," the ruling observed.

Justice Nagarathna made a pointed remark on the physical and mental toll on women judges, noting that they often endure severe discomfort and stress to meet the demanding requirements of their profession. "Women take medication to suppress pain and work through the day. This must be realized," she said.

The court also highlighted the unfair burden placed on judges assigned to vacant courts, where procedural delays can unfairly impact performance evaluations. "Reopening a vacant court is an arduous task. Witnesses must be called, cases re-examined, and proceedings revived. To blame a judge for low case disposal under such circumstances is unjust," the bench remarked.

This ruling is a significant step towards ensuring gender sensitivity in the judicial system, reaffirming the principle that justice must be served with fairness and empathy.