RAM KUMAR KASHYAP AND ANR. versus UNION OF INDIA

Citation: [2009] 12 S.C.R. 601 · Decided: 07-08-2009 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: K.G. BALAKRISHNAN · Disposal: Dismissed

Cited by 1 judgment(s) · see the full citation network in Lexace

Judgment (excerpt)

[2009] 12 S.C.R. 601 
" .. 
RAM KUMAR KASHYAP AND ANR. 
A 
V. 
UNION OF INDIA 
(Writ Petition (Civil) No. 431 of 2008) 
AUGUST 7, 2009 
B 
(K.G. SALAKRISHNAN, CJI., P. SATHASIVAM ANO J.M. 
PANCHAL, JJ.l 
,, 
,..,-"' 
> 
Constitution of India, 1950: Article 317 - Reference 
under~ Suspension of members and Chairman of Public c 
Setvice Commission - Neither Show Cause Notice issued nor 
opportunity of hearing afforded - Whether there was violation 
of nature/ justice - HiiJld: Principle of service law ordinarily 
applicable in case of dismissal of government employees 
cannot be extended to proceedings for suspension of D 
> 
'! 
member/chairman of Public Service Commission -
No 
hearing or opportunity of showing cause was necessary before 
making reference - Thus there was no violation of natural 
justice. 
The writ petitions are filed in this Court challenging 
E 
the reference made by the President of India under Article 
} 
y 
317(1), whereby 8 members and the Chairman of Public 
Service Commission were placed under suspension by 
the Governor of Haryana. The grievance of petitioners is 
F 
that they were neither given show cause notice nor an 
opportunity of hearing before the order of suspension 
and thereby the principle of natural justice was violated. 
Dismissing the writ petitions, the Court 
HELD: 1.1. Article 317 of the Constitution of India G 
makes it amply clear as to how the members of the Public 
Service Commission are liable to be removed from office. 
The foundin-g fathers of Indian Constitution incorporated 
601 
H 
602 
SUPREME COURT REPORTS 
(2009] 12 S.C.R. 
A this procedure in order to give the Chairman and 
Members security of tenure to safeguard them against 
motivated or wrong charges of misbehaviour. The 
obvious intent behind the same is to protect them from 
undue political pressures or personal favoritism and 
B vendetta thereby enabling the Public Service 
Commissions to discharge their constitutional 
obligations in full measure. [Para 3) [606-F-H] 
State of Orissa v. Dr. (Miss) Bina Pani Dei and others 
C AIR 1967 SC 1269; Sayeedur Rehman v. The State of Bihar 
& others (1973) 3 SCC 333j S.L. Kapoor v. Jagmohan & 
others (1980) 4 SCC 379; Olga Tellis & Others v. Bombay 
Municipal Corporation & others (1985) 3 SCC 545, referred 
to. 
D 
1.2. It is not necessary that principles of · audi alterem 
partem' rigorously followed in the domain of service law 
need to be applied with the same degree of rigour in 
proceedings involving the removal and suspension of the 
members of the State Public Service Commission. This 
E exceptional treatment is mandated by Article 317. 
Furthermore, the issuance of suspension orders is as per 
the 'procedure established by law' and not in derogation 
from the same. [Para 5) [607-C-E] 
F 
Special Reference No. 1 of 1983 (1990) 4 SCC 262 -
held inapplicable. 
G 
Reference No. 1 of 2003 (2005) 6 SCC 789; Sayalee 
Sanjeev Joshi, In Re (2007) 11 SCC 547T, referred to. 
2. The petitioners were not entitled to an opportunity 
to show cause or to be heard before the point of time that 
the orders of suspension were passed by the Governor 
of Haryana under Article 317(2) after the President had 
referred the matter to the Supreme Court. The rationale 
H behind empowering the Governor of a State to issue such 
. ,, 
v 
I 
RAM KUMAR KASHYAP AND ANR. 11. UNION OF 
603 
INDIA 
an order for suspension even before the reference is A 
'1 
-< 
actually decided by the Supreme Court is to maintain the 
public trust and confidence in the impartial and honest 
working of the said Public Service Commission. It is a 
prerogative given to the State Executive, but the 
members so suspended are given the opp_ortunity to 
B 
present their cases when the actual .reference is decided 
upon by the Supreme Court. It is open to the members 
so suspended to present their point of view at that stage. 
After all, it is only after the merits of the case are examined 
...... 
.~ 
that the Supreme Court arrives at an answer to the c 
reference and communicates the decision to the 
President for further action. The Public Service 
Commission is an institution of the utmost importance 
created by the Constitution of India under Article 315. For 
the efficient functioning of a democracy it is imperative D 
that the Public Service Commissions are manned by 
~ 
)' 
people of the highest skill and irrepmachable integrity, so 
that the selections to various· public .posts can be 
immunized from all so

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