Supreme Court Directs Inquiry into Misbehaviour of Public Service Commission Member — Charges Framed for Examination Malpractices. Court Ordered Charges 1, 2, 4, and 5 to be Framed Against Member Based on Evidence Presented by Attorney General Under Article 317 of the Constitution.

  • 0
Judgement Image
Font size:
Print

Case Note & Summary

The Supreme Court of India addressed a reference made by the President concerning Smt. Sayalee Sanjeev Joshi, a Member of the Maharashtra Public Service Commission, regarding allegations of misbehaviour linked to examination malpractices in 1999. Following complaints and an investigation by the Anti Corruption Bureau, she was arrested in 2003, leading to a Public Interest Litigation alleging conspiracy involving high officials. The President received communications from the Governor of Maharashtra and the Commission, prompting the inquiry under Article 317 of the Constitution. The court initially directed the Attorney General to outline the charges and evidence against Joshi. After reviewing the material, the Attorney General proposed to drop two of the six charges but maintained that four charges were substantiated by evidence. The court heard arguments from both sides, with Joshi's counsel asserting that the charges lacked evidence and were unfounded. The court decided to frame charges 1, 2, 4, and 5 against Joshi while allowing her to contest the relevance of charge 4 in relation to the Presidential reference. The matter was scheduled for further hearing on October 25, 2005.

Headnote

A) Constitutional Law - Removal of Member - Grounds for Removal - Article 317 of the Constitution of India - The President referred the matter for inquiry regarding misbehaviour of Smt. Sayalee Sanjeev Joshi, Member of the Maharashtra Public Service Commission, based on allegations of involvement in examination malpractices. The court directed the framing of charges against her after considering the Attorney General's suggestions and the responses from the parties involved. Held that charges 1, 2, 4, and 5 were to be framed (Paras 1-3).

Subscribe to unlock Headnote Subscribe Now

Issue of Consideration

Whether Smt. Sayalee Sanjeev Joshi ought to be removed from the office of the Member of the Maharashtra Public Service Commission on grounds of misbehaviour.

Subscribe to unlock Issue of Consideration Subscribe Now

Final Decision

The court directed that charges 1, 2, 4, and 5 be framed against Smt. Sayalee Sanjeev Joshi and scheduled the matter for further hearing on October 25, 2005.

Law Points

  • Article 317 of the Constitution of India
  • misbehaviour
  • inquiry procedure
  • framing of charges
Subscribe to unlock Law Points Subscribe Now

Case Details

2005 LawText (SC) (10) 66

Special Reference Case 1 of 2004

2005-10-05

B.P. Singh, Tarun Chatterjee, P.K. Balasubramanyan

Amarendra Sharan, V.A. Mohta, Ajit Kumar Sinha

Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more) Subscribe Now

Nature of Litigation

Inquiry into the conduct of a member of the Maharashtra Public Service Commission.

Remedy Sought

Inquiry and report on the removal of Smt. Sayalee Sanjeev Joshi.

Filing Reason

Allegations of misbehaviour and involvement in examination malpractices.

Issues

Grounds for removal of a public service commission member Validity of charges framed against Smt. Sayalee Sanjeev Joshi

Submissions/Arguments

Charges lack supporting evidence All charges should be framed against Joshi

Ratio Decidendi

The court determined that there was sufficient material to frame certain charges against Smt. Sayalee Sanjeev Joshi, while allowing her to contest the relevance of one charge.

Judgment Excerpts

The President of India in exercise of powers conferred by clause (1) of Article 317 of the Constitution of India referred to this Court for inquiry and report. The court directed that charge Nos. 1, 2, 4 and 5 contained in the note of the learned Attorney General for India be framed against Smt. Sayalee Sanjeev Joshi.

Procedural History

The President referred the matter to the Supreme Court, which directed the Attorney General to outline charges. The Attorney General submitted a statement of charges, and the court heard arguments from the parties regarding the framing of charges.

Acts & Sections

  • Constitution of India: Article 317
Subscribe to unlock full Legal Analysis Subscribe Now
Related Judgement
Supreme Court Supreme Court Modifies High Court Order on History Sheet Surveillance, Directs Protection of Minor Relatives' Identities and Periodic Audit. Court upholds right to privacy and dignity under Article 21, mandates compliance with Juvenile Justice Act an...
Related Judgement
High Court Bombay High Court Dismisses Contempt Petition for Non-Compliance of Order in Customs Detention Case — No Willful Disobedience Found. Court held that mere non-compliance without contumacious conduct does not attract contempt under Article 215 of the...