Chief Justice of India H L Dattu has entrusted with Chief Justice of Karnataka High Court, Justice D H Waghela, the task of going into the sexual harassment allegations levelled by a former woman judicial officer against a sitting Madhya Pradesh High Court judge.
The apex court, which had earlier quashed a two-judge panel set up the Madhya Pradesh High Court Chief Justice to probe the HC judge's alleged misconduct, has chosen Justice Waghela for inquiring into the allegations.
This comes in the wake of the judgement in which the apex court had earlier "divested" the MP High Court judge of administrative and supervisory authority.
Rapping the High Court Chief Justice for constituting a two-Judge Committee by which he clearly traversed beyond his jurisdictional authority under the "in-house procedure", the apex court had also said he should be kept out of the procedure of inquiry.
It had said that the second stage of in-house inquiry proceedings have to be commenced by the Chief Justice of India.
It had said that "to ensure fair and just inquiry, it is imperative to divest respondent number 3 (the judge concerned)" of supervisory and administrative functions.
The apex court had said that the Chief Justice of India may re-initiate the in-house proceedings or may ask the Chief Justice of other high court to do the same.
Earlier, the apex court had restrained the media from covering the proceedings in the case. It, however, had said that the December 18, 2014 judgement can be reported.
It had on August 29 stayed an August 8 order of the Chief Justice of the High Court setting up a judicial panel to probe the allegations levelled by the former woman judge.
The former Gwalior judge, who had resigned alleging sexual harassment by the HC judge, had moved the apex court raising questions over the judicial panel comprising judges of the same High Court to look into her complaint.
In her plea, she had said that her resignation is a "constructive termination" and she be reinstated with all consequential benefits.
The Gwalior judge had also objected to the summons being sent to her husband and daughter to be present at the inquiry.
The bench had agreed with the submission of the former woman judicial officer that the Chief Justice of the High Court had no jurisdiction to constitute a two-judge committee in terms of the "in-house procedure".
