The Gujarat High Court has upheld the dismissal of Senior Civil Judge Asha Harishchandra Dave, holding that her conduct concerning judicial accommodation and correspondence with senior judicial authorities justified her removal from service.
A Division Bench of Justice N. S. Sanjay Gowda and Justice J. L. Odedra dismissed her petition challenging the disciplinary action, finding no grounds to interfere with the dismissal order.
The dispute began in 2012, when Dave was transferred from Vadodara to Deesa. After being informed that judicial accommodation was unavailable, she was asked to arrange private accommodation herself.
Instead, she wrote to the Principal District Judge, Palanpur, seeking permission to spend the night on the pavement, commute daily from Palanpur to Deesa with travel allowances, and have accommodation arranged through the District Collector.
The incident led to disciplinary proceedings. Further charges arose from letters she addressed to the Chief Justice of the Gujarat High Court, including a request for a recommendation to transfer a sitting High Court judge.
Three departmental inquiries were initiated. The inquiry officer found the charges proved, and the High Court's Full Court accepted the recommendation for dismissal. The State Government subsequently issued the dismissal notification.
Dave challenged the dismissal, arguing that the departmental inquiries violated the principles of natural justice and denied her a fair opportunity to defend herself.
The High Court, however, noted that she had received multiple opportunities to participate in the proceedings and had been permitted to engage an advocate. The judgment also records her requests for adjournments and objections concerning legal representation, while noting that she did not participate in the departmental inquiries.
The Bench also examined her demand for judicial accommodation, observing that judicial officers receive House Rent Allowance when government quarters are unavailable.
The judgment stated, “There is no rule which mandates that furnishing of a quarter to a judicial officer is a ‘must’.”
The Court held that threatening to spend the night on the pavement to draw public attention undermined the judiciary's institutional dignity. It also criticised her correspondence seeking a recommendation to transfer a sitting High Court judge and the language used in her letter to the Chief Justice, describing the conduct as serious indiscipline and insubordination.
The Bench noted that the charges were supported by oral, documentary and video evidence. It further observed that Dave had not explicitly denied the allegations and had not availed herself of multiple opportunities to defend her position.
Finding the dismissal justified, the Gujarat High Court held that there was no reason to interfere with the disciplinary action. The Bench accordingly dismissed the writ petition.
Case Title: Asha Harishchandra Dave v. State of Gujarat & Anr.
Case Number: R/Special Civil Application No. 16429 of 2025
