This is an appeal against the judgment and order dated September 23, 2014, passed by the Hon’ble Single Judge in W.P.No.22801 of 2014 dismissing the writ petition.

2. The short point that arises for consideration in this writ appeal pertains to the power of the Hon’ble Governor to suspend a member of a State Public Service Commission under Article 317(2) of the Constitution of India.

3. The appellant, Dr.Mangala Sridhar, was appointed as a Member of the Karnataka Public Service Commission (hereinafter referred to as ‘KPSC’ in short) under Article 316(1) of the Constitution of India by an order issued by the Governor of Karnataka on November 24, 2012. There were various allegations and counter allegations pertaining to corruption, which led to an investigation by Criminal Investigation Department (‘CID’ in short) and, also, the annulment of evaluations of the written examinations pertaining to certain GroupA and Group-B posts intended to be filled upon in accordance with the Karnataka Gazetted Probationers Appointment (Competitive Examination) Rules, 1977. On August 14, 2014, the State Government ordered closure of the recruitment process, which was challenged before the Karnataka State Administrative Tribunal, ultimately leading to the order dated October 19, 2016 of the Karnataka State Administrative Tribunal discarding the investigation report of CID and quashing the Government Order of August 14, 2014.

4. In the meantime, on May 14, 2014, the Governor of Karnataka issued an order under Article 317(2) of the Constitution of India suspending the appellant from the membership of KPSC with immediate effect. It is this order of suspension that was challenged in the writ petition.

5. While various contentions were raised in the writ petition by either side, including contentions regarding maintainability, the crucial question pertained to whether the Governor can suspend a member of the State Public Service Commission under Article 317(2) even prior to a reference being made to the Supreme Court of India under Article 317(1) by the Hon’ble President.

6. It is the case of the appellant that under Article 317(1), a member of the State Public Service Commission can only be removed from his/her office by order of the President of India, on the ground of misbehavior, only after Supreme Court of India, on a reference being made to it by the President, on enquiry, holds that such a member ought to be removed. It is the, further, case of the appellant that under Article 317(2), the Governor, in the case of the State Public Service Commission, may suspend a member from the Commission only after a reference has been made to the Supreme Court of India by the President under Article 317(1).

7. The appellant contends that factually, in the instant case, the Governor of Karnataka had made a request to the President on May 14, 2014 and on the very day, the Appellant’s membership of KPSC was suspended by the Governor. It is not in dispute that the President had not made a reference to the Supreme Court of India under Article 317(1) on May 14, 2014. In fact, no reference has been made by the President of India to the Supreme Court of India, in the case pertaining to the appellant till date. The appellant, therefore, contends that in the absence of a reference by the President to the Supreme Court of India under Article 317(1), the Governor did not had the power to suspend the appellant from the membership of KPSC under Article 317(2) and, inter alia, on that ground, she challenged the order of suspension dated May 14, 2014, which was upheld by the Hon’ble Single Judge, by the order impugned.

8. We have heard Mr.Sajan Poovayya, learned senior advocate for the appellant; and Mr.A.S.Ponnanna, Additional Advocate General for the respondent State.

9. The points for our consideration are:

(a) Whether the Governor while exercising powers under Article 317(2) can act at his discretion or is he bound by the aid and advice of the Council of Ministers unde