Abraham Thomas, New Delhi
May 23, 2025 07:28 AM IST
The Supreme Court reinstated a lady judicial officer, emphasizing that greater female representation in the judiciary enhances decision-making quality.
The Supreme Court on Thursday held that greater representation of women in judiciary will improve quality of judicial decision-making as it directed reinstatement of a lady judicial officer from a scheduled tribe community in Rajasthan who was removed for not past employment details while applying for the civil judge’s post.
A bench of justices BV Nagarathna and SC Sharma said, “Non-disclosure of past government service cannot be a ground for discharging the appellant…In the considered opinion of this court, the appellant has been awarded capital punishment for a minor irregularity (omission).”
The court was hearing a petition filed by Pinky Meena who challenged Rajasthan high court’s decision refusing to allow her to continue in service after completing her probation period. Meena was a grade–II teacher in the Rajasthan education department. She applied for Rajasthan Judicial Service and appointment order was issued to her in February 2019 . Based on a private complaint against her, the high court initiated an inquiry against her.
A show cause notice was issued under Rule 16 of Rajasthan Civil Services (Classification, Control and Appeal) Rules, 1958 and based on an inquiry report, she was discharged from service in May 2020. Ordering Meena to be put back into service as a permanent judicial officer, justice Sharma, writing the judgment for the bench, said, “Many have stressed that increased diversity within a judiciary, and ensuring judges are representative of society, enables the judiciary as a whole to better respond to diverse social and individual contexts and experiences. It is a recognition of this fact that a greater representation of women in the judiciary, would greatly improve the overall quality of judicial decision making and this impacts generally and also specifically in cases affecting women.” Noting the struggles the petitioner had gone through, the bench said, “The appellant has shown great perseverance by fighting societal stigmas and gaining a rich education that will ultimately benefit the judicial system and the democratic project.”
