Judgment

HEGDE, J.:- These are appeals by special leave. In both these appeals we are concerned with the validity of the removal from office of the concerned respondents under S. 10 (1) (e) (iv) of the Electricity (Supply) Act, 1948 (which will hereinafter be referred to as the Act).

2. We shall first take up the case of the respondent Shri Baktawar Singh. He was appointed as a member of the Punjab State Electricity Board, Patiala by the Punjab Government on April 29, 1967 for a period of five years under S. 5 of the Act. After giving him a show cause notice and obtaining his reply thereto the Punjab Government removed him from the membership of the electricity board on April 25, 1969 in purported exercise of its powers under S. 10 (1) (e) (iv) of the Act. He challenged the validity of the order removing him from office by means of a writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution before the High Court of Punjab and Haryana on various grounds. The High Court of Punjab and Haryana has accepted his writ petition and quashed the order complained of.

3. Now coming to the case of the respondent Shri Rajinder Pal Abrol, he was appointed as a member of the Punjab State Electricity Board, Patiala by the Punjab Government on August 20, 1968 for a period of five years under S. 5 of the Act. After giving him a show cause notice and obtaining his reply thereto, he was removed from the membership of the board on August 1, 1969. The government purported to remove him under S. 10 (1) (e) (iv) of the Act. He also challenged the validity of the order removing him before the High Court of Punjab and Haryana. His petition was also accepted and the impugned order struck down.

4. Aggrieved by the judgments of the High Court, the State Government has brought up these appeals.

5. Before proceeding to discuss the issues arising for decision, we may mention that so far as Shri Baktawar Singh was concerned, he was initially appointed on a salary of Rs. 1200/- per month but later on his salary was raised to Rs. 1800/- per month. Shri Rajinder Pal Abrol was appointed as an honorary member. He was not entitled to any salary. One further fact that needs to be mentioned at this stage is that both Shri Baktawar Singh and Shri Rajinder Pal Abrol were appointed by Shri Lachhman Singh Gill when he was the Minister for Electricity. At the time of their appointments, Shri Lachhman Singh Gill was a member of the ministry headed by Shri Gurnam Singh. Later on there was a rift between Shri Gurnam Singh and Shri Lachhman Singh Gill as a result of which Shri Gurnam Singh s ministry fell and a new ministry was formed by Shri Lachhman Singh Gill. That ministry also fell at a later stage and the same was followed up by President s rule. Thereafter there was a fresh election and after the election, Shri Gurnam Singh formed a fresh ministry. Shri Baktawar Singh and Shri Rajinder Pal Abrol were removed from their membership when the ministry of Shri Gurnam Singh was in office after the elections. It is seen from the material on record that Shri Baktawar Singh as well as Shri Rajinder Pal Abrol were friends of Shri Lachhman Singh Gill.

6. Various grounds were taken by Shri Baktawar Singh and Shri Rajinder Pal Abrol in challenging the validity of the impugned orders. We have not thought it necessary to go into all those grounds as we are of opinion that the impugned orders are vitiated for the reasons to be mentioned hereinafter.

7. Section 10 of the Act reads:

"(1) The State Government may suspend from office for such period as it thinks fit or remove from office any member of the Board who-

(a) is found to be a lunatic or becomes of unsound mind or

(b) is adjudged insolvent; or

(c) fails to comply with the provisions of S. 9; or

(d) becomes or seeks to become a member of (Parliament) or any State legislature or any local authority; or

(e) in the opinion of the State Government -

(i) has refused to act;

(ii) has become incapable of acting; or

(iii) has so abused his position as a member