Back
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
S. Murtaza Fazl Ali and O. Chinnappa Reddy, JJ.
State of M.P.
v.
Ramashankar Raghuvanshi and others
Appeal No. 4679 of 1980
Decided on : 21-2-1982
India is a republic. More than 30 years ago, on January 26, 1950 the people of India resolved to constitute India into a democratic republic and to secure to all its citizens "Liberty of thought, expression, belief, faith and worship Equality of status and opportunity"; and to promote "Fraternity, assuring the dignity of the individual". This determination of the people, let us hope, is not a forgotten chapter, of history. The determination has been written into the Articles of the Constitution in the shape of Fundamental Rights and they are what makes India a democratic republic and what marks India from authoritarian or police States. The right to freedom of speech and expression, the right to form associations and unions, the right to assemble peaceably and without arms, the right to equality before the law and the equal protection of the laws, the right to equality of opportunity in matters relating to employment or appointment to any office under the State are declared Fundamental Rights. Yet the Government of Madhya Pradesh seeks to deny employment to the respondent on the ground that the report of a Police Officer stated that he once belonged to some political organisation. It is important to note that the action sought to be taken against the respondent is not any disciplinary action on the ground of his present involvement in political activity after entering the service of the Government, contrary to some Service Conduct Rule. It is further to be noted that it is not alleged that the respondent ever participated in any illegal, vicious or subversive activity. There is no hint that the respondent was or is a perpetrator of violent deeds, or that he exhorted anyone to commit violent deeds. There is no reference to any addiction to violence or vice or any incident involving violence, vice or other crime. All that is said is that before he was absorbed in Government service, he had taken part in some ‘RSS or Jansangh activities’. What those activities were has never been disclosed. Neither the RSS nor the Jansangh is alleged to be engaged in any subversive or other illegal activity; nor are the organisations banned. Most people, including intellectuals, may not agree with the programme and philosophy of the Jansangh and the RSS or, for that matter, of many other political parties, and organisations of an altogether different hue. But that is irrelevant. Everyone is entitled to his thoughts and views. There are no barriers. Our Constitution guarantees that, in fact members of these organisations continue to be members of Parliament and State Legislatures. They are heard often with respect, inside and outside the Parliament. What then was the sin that the respondent committed in participating in some political activity before his absorption into Government service? What was wrong in his being a member of an organisation which is not even alleged to be devoted to subversive or illegal activities? The whole idea of seeking a police report on the political faith and the past political activity of a candidate for public employment appears to our mind to cut at the very root of the Fundamental Rights of equality of opportunity in the matter of employment, freedom of expression and freedom of association. It is a different matter altogether if a police report is sought on the question of the involvement of the candidate in any criminal or subversive activity in order to find out his suitability for public employment, But why seek a police report on the politics faith of a candidate and act upon it? Politics is no crime, Does it mean that only no true Believers in the political faith of the party in power for the time being are entitled to public employment [Para 3
We are not for a moment suggesting, that even after entry into Government service, a person may engage himself in political activities. All that we say is that he cannot be turned back at the very threshold on the ground of his past political activities. Once he becomes a Government servant, he becomes subject to the various rules regulating his conduct and his activities must naturally be subject to all rules made in conformity with the Constitution. [Para 10
JUDGMENT
FAZAL ALI, J.
1. Since, we are clearly of the view that the special leave petition should be dismissed in limine on merits. I would not like to go any further in to the details of the facts of the case. I would, therefore, refrain from expressing any opinion on the observations made by my learned brother, Chinnappa Reddy, J.
CHINNAPPA REDDY, J.–2. This special leave petition has to be dismissed. There is no merit in it. The respondent was a teacher employed in a municipal school. The school was taken over by the Government in June 1971. The respondent was absorbed in Government service by an order dated February 28, 1972. The order recited that the absorption was subject of verification of antecedents and medical fitness. The services of the respondent were terminated on November 5, 1974. Though the order terminating the services of the respondent did not purport to stigmatize him in any manner, it was not disputed before the High Court and it is no longer disputed before us that the order was founded on a report made by the Superintendent of Police, Raigarh on October 31, 1974, to the effect that the respondent was not a fit person to be entertained in Government Service, as he had taken part in 'RSS and Jansangh activities'. The High Court held that the order of termination of service was of a 'punitive character and quashed it on the ground that the Provisions of Article 311 of the Constitution had not been complied with. The State of Madhya Pradesh has sought leave to appeal to this Court under Article 136 of the Constitution.
3. India is not a police State India is a democratic republic. More than 30 years ago, on January 26, 1950, the people of India resolved to constitute India in to a democratic republic and to secure to an its citizens “Liberty of thought, expression, belief, faith and worship; Equality of status and opportunity”, and to promote “Fraternity, assuring the dignity of the individual” This determination of the people let us hope is not a forgotten chapter of history. The determination has been written in to the Articles of the Constitution in the shape of Fundamental Rights and they are what makes India a democratic republic and what marks India from authoritarian or police States. The right to freedom of speech and expression, the right to form associations and unions, the right to assemble peaceably and without arms, the right to equality before the law and the equal protection of the laws, the right to equality of opportunity in matters relating to employment or appointment to any office under the State are declared Fundamental Rights. Yet the Government of Madhya Pradesh seeks to deny employment to the respondent on the ground that the report of a Police Officer stated that he once belonged to some political organization. It is important to not that the action sought to be taken against the respondent is not any disciplinary action on the ground of his present involvement in political activity after entering .the service of, the Government, contrary to some Service Conduct Rule. It is further to be noted that it is not alleged that the respondent ever participated in any illegal, vicious or subversive activity. There is no hint that the respondent, was or is a perpetrator of violent deeds, or that he exhorted anyone to commit violent deeds. There is no reference to any addiction to violence or vice or any incident involving violence, vice or other crime. All that is said is that before he was absorbed in Government service, be had taken part in some 'RSS or Jansangh activities'. What those activities were bas never been disclosed. Neither the RSS nor the Jansangh is alleged to be engaged in any subversive or other illegal activity; nor are the organisations banned. Most people, including into electoral, may not agree with the programme and philosophy of the Jansangh and the RSS or for that matter, of many other political parties and organisations of an altogether different hue. But that is irrele
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
