AP Additional District judge alleges caste discrimination by sitting High Court judge, moves Supreme Court for enquiry [Updated]

An Additional District judge in the State of Andhra Pradesh has approached the Supreme Court under Article 32 alleging caste discrimination by a sitting High Court judge, Justice M Satyanarayana Murthy. The case is listed for admission on March 30..The petition has been filed by Bhishma Gangeyudu (Petitioner), who is a fast track court judge in Rajamundry, Andhra Pradesh. He belongs to the “Madiga” community, a Scheduled Caste community in Andhra Pradesh. Gangeyudu was a practising advocate before being appointed a fast track court judge in 2003. He served in the Khammam district till 2007 and subsequently in Vizag till 2010. He was appointed as sixth Additional District judge of East Godavari District in 2010 and was posted to Rajamundry. Here he was subordinate to the alleged perpetrator of caste discrimination, Justice M Satyanarayana Murthy, who was then a Principal District judge. Justice Murthy is currently a sitting judge of the High Court of Andhra Pradesh and Telengana..As per the petition,.“Mr. M. Satyanarayna Murthy, Principal District Judge, and Third Respondent who belongs to B.C. community, who is full of caste ego and has an unexplained prejudice against scheduled caste persons like the petitioner from the day one. He lost no chance to humiliate and harass the petitioner from day one on one pretext or other always reminding him that he does not deserve the status of a colleague, being born in a lower caste, some time directly and indirectly.”.The petitioner then proceeds to make a barrage of allegations against Mr. Murthy’s conduct alleging that he has a history of harassing judicial officers and staff..“The said 3rd Respondent earlier worked in Guntur District and was known for harassing the judicial staff and also other judicial officers who did not tow his way. In one stroke of the pen he suspended 18 members of judicial staff on flimsy grounds and the High Court on the same day intervened and cancelled those suspensions and also revoked his administrative powers for some time. Again in Guntur having a grudge against another colleague, Senior Civil judge, Ranjan Kumar, instigated one of his attender to file a false case of Section 354. When all the judicial officers there revolted against this injustice, he himself got it closed. When Shri. P.D. M. Mohan Rao, Secretary of Judicial Officer took objection to his contact, he instigated a temporary employee to give a false complaint against Shri Mohan Rao and influence the higher official to suspend him. Unable to bear his harassment, one lady A.D.M., by name Laxmi, working there gave a complaint to High Court and also tendered her resignation. He again fell at her feet and compelled her withdraw her complaint. Thus it is his natural instinct to harass others and if anybody revolts fall at their feet and later again resume his torture at a later date.”.The petitioner has alleged that he was denied sufficient staff required to carry out his judicial duties and when he requested for an attender to fill in for one of his attenders, who was allowed to go on a long leave, Justice Murthy “not only flatly rejected his request outright, but also jeered at him with disdain implying a low caste born requires no attenders as per rules.”.The petition further states that Gangeyudu.“..was denied even the courtesy of a judicial chair with the official symbol of lions while sitting and discharging judicial duties. While the petitioner complained about it to the District Judge, he just ignored it. At last the Registrar General had to intervene and direct him through ROC No. 1673/20-11-E1 (14) dated 30-06-2011 to provide the chair to the petitioner after 1 ½ years of posting.”.Gangeyudu has claimed that Justice Murthy, subsequently, instigated lower category employees to file false complaints against him and got him transferred to different places on punitive grounds. He has also alleged that Justice Murthy,.“influenced the higher ups in the High Court so as to make the petitioner fail in the examination and interview held for regularization of the petitioner subsequently.”.The Petitioner has also submitted that though he had made representations to various authorities and though the Law Ministry and the President of India had directed the Registrar General of the High Court to look into his complaint, the same was suppressed by the High Court due to the influence of Justice Murthy who had by then been elevated as a judge of the High Court..Gangeyudu has contended that the acts and omissions of Justice Murthy amount to practice of untouchability and caste discrimination prohibited by Article 17 of the Constitution of India and also section 7 Sub section 1 of Protection of Civil Rights Act 1955 and also section 3 (IX) and (X) of SC and ST ( Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989..On the basis of the above, the Petitioner has sought an enquiry into the alleged caste discrimination and harassment meted out to him by Justice Murthy. He has also prayed for direction to the Centre to enact law to “prevent subtler and indirect forms of caste discrimination in the work place, both public and private on lines with federal legislation in U.S.A.”.The matter will come up for admission as item 22 in Chief Justice Dattu’s court on Monday..Update March 30, 2015: The Supreme Court refused to admit the matter today. It allowed the petitioner to withdraw the petition while granting him the liberty to approach the appropriate forum. The Bench headed by Chief Justice Dattu likened the case to a service matter and observed that the case invloves grievance of an individual and cannot be considered as a case pertaining to Fundamental rights. Senior Advocate Venkataramani appeared for the Petitioner..Image taken from here.