Back
PRASANNA B. VARALE, M. G. S. KAMAL
Shashi Prasad Gandhi @ S. P. Gandhi, S/o. Late Narayanappa – Appellant
Versus
State of Karnataka, Rep. by its Chief Secretary – Respondent
ORDER :
Writ petition in W.P.No.10843/2021 is filed seeking issue of a writ of quo-warranto quashing the Notification No.DPAR 60 SLA 2021 dated 03.04.2021 as per Annexure-F by which the respondent No.3 has been appointed as Chairman of the Karnataka Public Service Commission (hereinafter referred to as “KPSC”) under Article 316 (1) of the Constitution of India, while Writ Petition in W.P.No.12030/2020 is filed seeking issue of a writ of quo-warranto prohibiting respondent Nos.4 to 14 from exercising their duties as members of the Karnataka Public Service Commission who are appointed in terms of Notifications produced at Annexures-A, B, C and D.
2. Since both these writ petitions, though filed as public interest litigations, involve identical facts situation and issues concerning appointment of members and Chairman to the ‘KPSC’, they are heard together and being disposed of by this common order.
3. The grievance of the petitioners in both the writ petitions is that the State Government has not considered the directions purportedly issued by the Hon’ble Apex Court while appointing
The discretionary power of the Court in issuing a writ of quo warranto and the principles guiding the issuance of such writs.
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the appointment made under Article 316(1) is complete and removal requires adherence to Article 317. The court held that the recall of the app....
The court affirmed the need for transparent and qualified appointments to the KSPCB, holding that the guidelines must align with statutory provisions and prior court rulings.
Point of Law : Since the appointment of the 7th respondent is made, creating a supernumerary post, there is no other option to the petitioner, than to approach this Court, by filing a writ petition s....
The court found that the chairman and members of the Haryana Public Service Commission misbehaved by failing to maintain integrity, refusing to cooperate with investigations, and engaging in arbitrar....
The autonomy and independence of Public Service Commissions in the selection process, and the authority of the Government to make recommendations to KPSC without binding KPSC to accept such recommend....
The autonomy of the Kerala Public Service Commission (KPSC) in accepting or rejecting the Government's recommendation for expanding the list of candidates in public employment.
Autonomy of Kerala Public Service Commission (KPSC) in rejecting Government recommendations and the limitations on the power of the Government, Tribunal, or Court to direct KPSC beyond previous judgm....
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
