Administrative discretion in judicial service benefits cannot rest on unverified allegations or an unfounded adverse entry; super-time scale granted.

Grant of selection grade and super-time scale in the Higher Judicial Service fell within the High Court's administrative domain, but interference was justified where the decision was based on untested allegations, an adverse entry without foundation, and non-compliance with the governing rules. The secret letter relied on against the appellant was not supported by reliable material after denial, and the Chief Justice had found the adverse entry unfounded. As Rule 4(B) required adverse remarks to be placed before the Chief Justice before action, reliance on that entry contrary to the rule was impermissible. The rejection of super-time scale was set aside, and monetary benefits with revised pension were directed.

---

---

Issues: Whether the appellant was entitled to grant of the super-time scale and consequential monetary benefits, notwithstanding the Full Court's rejection based on unsubstantiated allegations and an adverse entry.

Analysis: Grant of selection grade and super-time scale in the Higher Judicial Service lay within the High Court's administrative domain, but judicial interference was warranted where the decision rested on violation of the governing rules, denial of natural justice, or material not supported by reliable evidence. The allegations in the secret letter were not tested by any reliable material and were not justified after the appellant's denial. The adverse entry was also found by the Chief Justice to be without foundation, and the proviso to Rule 4(B) of the U.P. Higher Judicial Service Rules, 1975 required adverse remarks to be placed before the Chief Justice before action was taken on them. Communication and reliance upon the adverse entry despite the Chief Justice's contrary view was contrary to the rule and unsupported by the record.

Conclusion: The appellant was entitled to the super-time scale and the rejection of that benefit was set aside. Monetary benefits and revised pension were directed to be granted in favour of the appellant.

---