Back
DELHI HIGH COURT
SATISH CHANDRA SHARMA, SUBRAMONIUM PRASAD
Nand Kishore Garg (Dr.) – Appellant
Versus
Govt. of NCT of Delhi – Respondent
JUDGMENT
Subramonium Prasad, J. The instant writ petition under Article 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India has been filed for issuance of a writ, order or direction in the nature of Mandamus to Respondent No.2/Lieutenant Governor of Delhi for initiating appropriate proceedings for suspension of Health Minister of Delhi Sh. Satyender Jain, who has been in custody since 30.05.2022.
2. It is stated that Sh. Satyender Jain, who has been in custody since 30.05.2022, has been enjoying all the perks and privileges of a Cabinet Minister, despite facing allegations of serious financial irregularities, and that this is violative of Article 14 of the Constitution of India inasmuch as a Government Servant, who is in custody for more than 48 hours, is to be put under deemed suspension as per the practice which is being followed relating to the Public/Government Servants in terms of Rule 10 of the Central Civil Services (Classification, Control & Appeal) Rules, 1965 (hereinafter referred to as "CCS (CCA) Rules, 1965"). It is stated that Respondent No.3/Sh. Satyender Jain has also committed breach of oath and he cannot be permitted to hold the office as a Minister.
3. The facts, in brie
The court ruled that the Central Civil Services (Classification, Control & Appeal) Rules, 1965 do not apply to Ministers, preserving the Chief Minister's discretion in making appointments despite cri....
The Court affirmed its lack of jurisdiction to issue a writ of quo warranto against a Chief Minister, reinforcing the Governor's exclusive authority under constitutional provisions.
A Chief Minister is not legally prohibited from engaging in non-official activities while in office unless explicitly stated in law, reflecting constitutional protections for freedom of speech and ex....
The Constitution does not prohibit a Member of Parliament from simultaneously holding the office of Chief Minister or Deputy Chief Minister, affirming the legality of Section 3(a) of the Parliament (....
The Chief Minister had no independent power assigned under the Rules of Business and Instructions issued thereunder to review or modify the decision taken by the concerned In-charge-Minister.
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
