SPECIAL REFERENCE CASE NO. 1 OF 1983 versus SPECIAL REFERENCE CASE NO. 1 OF 1983

SPECIAL REFERENCE CASE NO. 1 OF 1983 versus SPECIAL REFERENCE CASE NO. 1 OF 1983

The Supreme Court holds that it has the duty and jurisdiction under Article 317(1) to examine all relevant facts itself regarding allegations of misbehaviour, including motive and antecedent events. It is not bound by a prerequisite of a President's prior factual enquiry by any other body. Procedural safeguards including cross-examination must be observed. Considering commitments, the Court delegates recording of evidence to a District Judge, treating affidavits as examination-in-chief, and restricting evidence to cross-examination of affidavit-witnesses.

Parties
Chairperson, Punjab Public Service Commission: Smt. Santosh Chowdhary; Member, Punjab Public Service Commission (defaulting Member): Shri Gopal Krishan Saini; Respondent: State of Punjab; Respondent: Union of India
Jurisdiction
India
Judgment Date
17 August 1983
Procedural Posture
Special Reference Under Article 317(1) of the Constitution / Reference and Preliminary Procedural Directions
Outcome
Procedural directions issued; evidence to be recorded by delegated judge, not the Supreme Court directly. No determination on merits at this stage.
Legal Topics
Removal and Suspension of Members of Public Service Commission, Procedure Under Article 317(1), Supreme Court's Advisory Jurisdiction
Constitutional Law Administrative Law Removal and Suspension of Members of Public Service Commission Procedure Under Article 317(1) Supreme Court's Advisory Jurisdiction

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Legal principles 4 Authorities cited 5 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Smt. Santosh Chowdhary

Chairperson, Punjab Public Service Commission

Shri Gopal Krishan Saini

Member, Punjab Public Service Commission (defaulting Member)

State of Punjab

Respondent

Union of India

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Special Reference Under Article 317(1) of the Constitution / Reference and Preliminary Procedural Directions

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the President must refer a case to another fact-finding body before Supreme Court inquiry under Article 317(1)
  2. 2 Scope of Supreme Court's power and procedure under Article 317(1) regarding removal of Public Service Commission members for misbehaviour

Ratio Decidendi

The Supreme Court holds that it has the duty and jurisdiction under Article 317(1) to examine all relevant facts itself regarding allegations of misbehaviour, including motive and antecedent events. It is not bound by a prerequisite of a President's prior factual enquiry by any other body. Procedural safeguards including cross-examination must be observed. Considering commitments, the Court delegates recording of evidence to a District Judge, treating affidavits as examination-in-chief, and restricting evidence to cross-examination of affidavit-witnesses.

Court Disposition

Procedural directions issued; evidence to be recorded by delegated judge, not the Supreme Court directly. No determination on merits at this stage.

Orders

  • Evidence in the Reference to be recorded by an Additional District and Sessions Judge, Delhi, nominated for the purpose.
  • Affidavits filed in Supreme Court to be treated as examination-in-chief; evidence limited to cross-examination of such witnesses.