The court established the permissibility of delegation of power to hold an enquiry and the competence of the Vigilance Commission to proceed with the enquiry under the amended rule 14a of the C. C. A. Rules.

( 1 ) THIS writ petition is directed against a departmental enquiry that is being held against the petitioner who at the relevant time was an Assistant Controller of Civil Supplies, Bangalore. The petitioner has sought for the relief of a writ or direction in the nature of certiorari quashing the charges framed by respondent 2 (the Deputy Director of Vigilance, State Vigilance Commission, bangalore), in his memorandum No. ENJ 13/65-66 dated 26 May, 1966 and the Government order No. C1. 139 GCS 64 dated 26 October, 1965 and another Government order dated 11 march, 1966 bearing No. C1 23 AC1 65. The copies of the said documents have been produced by the petitioner as annexures D, B and A, respectively to the petition. He has further prayed for a writ or order in the nature of "prohibition" prohibiting respondent 2 from holding any further departmental proceeding pursuant to the Government order dated 26 October, 1965. He has also prayed for a declaration that rule 11 (2) of the Mysore Civil Services (Classification, Control and appeal) Rules, 1957, is ultra vires of the powers of the Government as the same is inconsistent with Art. 311 (2) of the Constitution of India.

( 2 ) THE petitioner was at the relevant point of time an Assistant Controller of Civil Supplies under the Government of Mysore. When he was functioning as Assistant Controller of Civil Supplies, owing to certain alleged irregularities in the discharge of his duties, the Government of Mysore proposed to take disciplinary action against him by holding a departmental enquiry. Hence, on 26 October, 1965, the Government directed the Vigilance Commissioner to hold the necessary enquiry by memorandum bearing No. C1. 138 GCS 64. The Vigilance Commissioner authorized one Sri M. M. Shirkol, Deputy Director of Vigilance (Judicial), to hold an enquiry by his order no. VCC 27-28/ 65-66 dated 3 November, 1965. The Deputy Director of Vigilance framed charges on 26 May, 1966 as per his memorandum No. ENJ 13/65-66. Subsequently, it would appear that Sri M. M. Shirkol retired from service on superannuation. The Vigilance commissioner, by an order dated 4 June, 1966, under No. VCC 27-28/65-66 purported to amend the authorization relating to the appointment of Sri M. M. Shirkol by the substitution of the name of Sri D. Noronha in place of Sri M. M. Shirkol. Sri D. Noronha took up the enquiry from the stage at which it was left by Sri M. M. Shirkol, and issued notice to the petitioner on 22 June, 1966, calling upon him to put in a statement of defence in respect of the charges framed against him. In the meanwhile, on 11 March, 1966, the petitioner was placed under suspension by an order of the Government. It is at this stage that the petitioner has approached this Court by this petition under Art. 226 of the Constitution for the reliefs enumerated earlier. Sri H. B. Datar, the learned counsel for the petitioner, has formulated various propositions which, briefly stated, are as follows :

(1) The power under Art. 311 (2) of the Constitution, being a judicial power exercisable by the appointing authority, cannot be delegated to the State Vigilance Commission for the purpose of holding a departmental enquiry against a civil servant, particularly having regard to the language of the amendment effected to Art. 311 (2) by the Constitution (Fifteenth Amendment) Act, 1963. (2) The State Vigilance Commission, being a delegate for the purpose of holding a departmental enquiry, cannot further delegate its functions to the Deputy Director of Vigilance, as in the present case. (3) The Deputy Director of Vigilance, namely, respondent 2, is not competent to hold the enquiry as he is not one of the authorities named under rule 3 of the Mysore State Vigilance commission Rules, 1965. (4) Since the irregularities, which have formed the basis of the charges framed against the petitioner, appertain to the year 1963-64, the enquiry under the Mysore State Vigilance commission Rules, 1965,