Case: Ram Kumar Kashyap &amp; Another Vs. Union of India &amp; Another

1. The Chairman and 8 members of the Haryana Public Service Commission were placed under suspension on 09.08.2008 by Governor of the State of Haryana. A Reference was made under Article 317(1) of the Constitution of India by the Honble President of India. In these Writ Petitions the petitioners have sought for a writ of certiorari for quashing the Reference made on 31.07.2008 by the Honble President of India under Article 317(1) of the Constitution of India and also for a direction that the order of suspension dated 09.08.2008 passed by the Governor of State of Haryana be declared as illegal and be quashed. When the matter came up for consideration, learned Senior Counsel appearing for the petitioners submitted that the first prayer for the writ of certiorari to quash the order of Reference under Article 317 (1) of the Constitution of India is not pressed. Therefore, the only question that arises for consideration in these Writ Petitions is whether the suspension of 8 Members and the Chairman of Public Service Commission by the Governor of Haryana by order dated 09.08.2008 is liable to be set aside or not.

Reasoning: 5. 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 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 same10. It is clear from the perusal of the above cases that 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 Honble Governor of Haryana under Article 317(2) after the President had referred the matter to the Supreme Court. The rationale behind empowering the Governor of a State to issue such an order for suspension even before the reference is 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 opportunity to 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 have been examined that the Supreme Court arrives at an answer to the reference and communicates the same decision to the President for further action11. 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 that the Public Service Commissions are manned by people of the highest skill and irreproachable integrity, so that the selections to various public posts can be immunized from all sorts of extraneous factors like political pressure or personal favoritism and are made solely on considerations of merit14. It is very clear that since the Public Service Commissions are a constitutional creation, the principles of service law that are ordinarily applicable in instances of dismissals of government employees cannot be extended to the proceedings for the removal and suspension of the members of the said Commissions. Hence, we are of the opinion that the en bloc suspension of the 8 Members and Chairman of the Haryana Public Service Commission by the Honble Governor of Haryana by an order dated 09.08.2008 under Article 317(2) of the Constitution and the impugned notification dated 09.08.2008 are valid and not liable to be quashed