2006 (5) TMI 474 - SC - Indian Laws

Whether in terminating the services the State committed gross violation of the provisions of Article 14 21 and 311 of the Constitution of India? Whether Principles of natural justice were completely given a go-by by the Stae in passing the impugned orders of termination? Whether some of the Appellants having successfully completed three years of probation they would be deemed to have been confirmed in terms of Rule 23 of the 1976 Rules and thus their services could not have been terminated without holding regular inquiry in terms of Punjab Civil Services (Punishment and Appeal) Rules 1970? Whether in any event Rule 23 of the 1970 Rules could not have been invoked for dispensing with the services of such of the Appellants as it had not been shown that their work conduct and performance were unsatisfactory during the period of probation? Whether no proper material by way of admissible evidence having been made available on the basis whereof the State could form a bona fide opinion that the entire selection processes were tainted the impugned orders of termination must be held to be bad in law?

Issues Involved:
1. Violation of Articles 14, 21, and 311 of the Constitution of India.
2. Principles of natural justice.
3. Termination of services without regular inquiry.
4. Applicability of Rule 23 of the 1970 Rules.
5. Bona fide opinion on the tainted selection process.
6. Separation of tainted and non-tainted officers.
7. Procedural irregularities and undue haste in termination.
8. Bias and conflict of interest in the judicial process.

Issue-Wise Detailed Analysis:

1. Violation of Articles 14, 21, and 311 of the Constitution of India:
The appellants argued that the State committed gross violations of Articles 14, 21, and 311 of the Constitution by terminating their services without due process. They contended that the termination orders were passed without complying with statutory rules and principles of natural justice, making the orders legally untenable.

2. Principles of Natural Justice:
The appellants claimed that the principles of natural justice were completely disregarded by the State in passing the termination orders. They argued that they were not given an opportunity to be heard or to inspect the evidence against them, which is a fundamental requirement for a fair process.

3. Termination of Services Without Regular Inquiry:
Some appellants had completed three years of probation and argued that they should be deemed confirmed under Rule 23 of the 1976 Rules. They contended that their services could not be terminated without a regular inquiry as mandated by the Punjab Civil Services (Punishment and Appeal) Rules, 1970.

4. Applicability of Rule 23 of the 1970 Rules:
The appellants argued that Rule 23 could not be invoked to terminate their services without showing that their work, conduct, and performance were unsatisfactory during the probation period. They emphasized that no proper material or admissible evidence was presented to justify the termination.

5. Bona Fide Opinion on the Tainted Selection Process:
The State argued that the satisfaction for termination was based on the Vigilance Bureau's report, which included statements pointing to the guilt of the Commission's Chairman, Mr. Sidhu. The report revealed large-scale corruption, manipulation of marks, and other irregularities in the selection process, making it impossible to separate meritorious candidates from the tainted ones.

6. Separation of Tainted and Non-Tainted Officers:
The appellants contended that the State failed to make any effort to separate tainted officers from non-tainted ones. They argued that the entire selection process could not be condemned without distinguishing between those involved in corruption and those who were not.

7. Procedural Irregularities and Undue Haste in Termination:
The Supreme Court observed that the State acted in undue haste in terminating the services of the officers. The termination orders were passed within a day of receiving a 90-page note from the Chief Secretary, indicating a lack of proper and due application of mind. The Court emphasized that actions taken in undue haste could be deemed mala fide.

8. Bias and Conflict of Interest in the Judicial Process:
The appellants argued that two senior judges who headed the committees investigating the selection process should not have been part of the Bench hearing the writ petitions. They contended that the judges' involvement in the committees created a bias and conflict of interest, violating the principle that justice must not only be done but also be seen to be done.

Conclusion:
The Supreme Court set aside the impugned judgment and the orders of the State Government and the High Court, directing the matters to be reconsidered afresh. The Court requested the High Court to constitute two independent scrutiny committees to examine the cases of executive officers and judicial officers separately. The committees were to provide copies of their reports to the appellants and allow them to inspect relevant documents. The Court emphasized the need for a thorough investigation to segregate tainted officers from non-tainted ones and to ensure that the principles of natural justice were upheld.

← Previous Next →