DR. V. R. SANAL KUMAR versus UNION OF INDIA & ORS.

Citation: [2023] 5 S.C.R. 772 · Decided: 12-05-2023 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: M.R. SHAH · Disposal: Dismissed

cites 4 · see the full citation network in Lexace

Judgment (excerpt)

A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
772
SUPREME COURT REPORTS
[2023] 5 S.C.R.
   [2023] 5 S.C.R. 772
772
DR. V. R. SANAL KUMAR
v.
UNION OF INDIA & ORS.
(Civil Appeal No(s). 6301 of 2013)
MAY 12, 2023
[M. R. SHAH AND C. T. RAVIKUMAR, JJ.]
Service Law:
Department of Space Employees (Classification, Control and
Appeal) Rules, 1976 – r. 16(iii) – Special procedure in certain cases
– Dismissal from service without holding any inquiry in the interest
of the security of the State, invoking power u/r. 16 (iii) – Interference
with – Appellant, high profile scientist in Indian Space Research
Organisation-ISRO – Disciplinary proceedings against the
appellant, alleging unauthorized absence from the country for
taking post-doctoral research without permission and publication
of a technical paper in the Conference in USA as first author with
a foreigner as one of the co-authors, without prior permission or
approval from the competent authority – Dismissed from service
from the date of absence – However, the tribunal held that the
dismissal of the appellant was with effect from the date of the
dismissal order, and quashed the order related to recovery of
subsistence allowance – Upheld by the High Court – On appeal,
held: When material capable of arriving at a satisfaction that it is
not expedient to hold an inquiry “in the interest of the security of
the State” are available, the decision in holding that it is inexpedient
“in the interest of the security of the State” to hold an inquiry
warrants no further scrutiny, rather, it is not fit to be subjected to
further judicial review – Having regard to appellant’s role as high
profile scientist in ISRO and the role of ISRO as the space agency
of India, the appellant’s unauthorized absence, unauthorized
association and persistent dealings with foreign institution especially
in the strategic research and development subject based on which
nation’s rocketry and ambitious programs are/were advancing, was
a matter of concern for the security of the State – Respondent
organisation cannot be said to have committed a flaw or fault in
entertaining suspicion on his honesty, integrity, reliability,
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
773
dependability and trustworthiness – Dismissal from the service
cannot be said to be illegal or absolutely unwarranted – Thus,
interference u/Art. 136 not called for – Judicial review – Constitution
of India – Arts. 311(2), 136.
Dismissing the appeal, the Court
HELD: 1.1 Clause (iii) of Rule 16 of the Department of
Space Employees (Classification, Control and Appeal) Rules,
1976 is a service rule virtually reproducing clause (c) of the
second proviso to Article 311 (2) of the Constitution of India
though the language used is not identical. The appellant did not
dispute that Rule 16 (iii) is in pari materia with clause (c) of the
second proviso to Article 311 (2). When once it is so found, there
cannot be any doubt with respect to the position, as settled in
Tulsiram Patel’s case and reiterated in subsequent decisions, that
adherence to principles of natural justice i.e., conducting inquiry
after issuing charge sheet and providing hearing to a government
servant on those charges, in case of proposal to impose any of
the three major penalties-dismissal, removal or reduction in rank
would not arise when the power under Rule 16 (iii) of the CCA
Rules is invoked. Bearing in mind the position of law thus revealed
it is to be considered whether judicial review is called for or not
in respect of the challenge of the appellant against his removal
from service without holding an inquiry in invocation of the power
under Clause (iii) of Rule 16 of the CCA Rules. [Para 16][790-C-
F]
1.2 It is obvious that the appellant himself knew that he is
a high-profile scientist in ISRO, which is a highly sensitive and
strategic research and development organisation under the
Department of Space, Government of India. The Court cannot
be an island and feign oblivion of the pivotal role of a scientist/
engineer attached to ISRO and also the role of ISRO as the space
agency of India. Obviously, it is involved in science, engineering
and technology to harvest the benefits of outer space for India.
The appellant is a scientist/engineer in the VSSC,
Thiruvananthapuram of ISRO. After applying for sabbatical leave
for one year and when the competent authority decided not to
recommend the leave in exigency of service, he applied for nine
days’ earned leave from 21.08.2003 to 29.08.2003 on personal
DR. V. R. SANAL KUMAR v. UNION OF INDIA

Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.