- (1.) This Reference has been made by the President of India to this Court under Article 317(1) of the Constitution of India seeking immediate suspension and removal of Shri Ravinder Pal Singh Sidhu, former Chairman, Punjab Public Service Commission (hereinafter referred to as the Commission), by taking action against him levelling several allegations of grave misconduct and mal-practices. In the Reference, it is stated that the matter requires an examination by this Court in terms of Article 317(1) of the Constitution. In the course of the letter sent by the Governor of Punjab to the President on 29th April, 2002, certain details as to the conduct of Shri Ravinder Pal Singh Sidhu while functioning as Chairman of the Commission are set out. There is also material placed before this Court in the nature of a Report sent by the Vigilance Bureau to the Chief Secretary to the Government of Punjab. It is not in dispute that criminal cases against the said Shri Ravinder Pal Singh Sidhu are pending in different Courts in the State of Punjab based on the allegations referred to in these two letters of the Governor of Punjab and the Vigilance Bureau.
(2.) After the Reference was received by this Court, notices were issued to the Attorney General for India, Advocate General for the State of Punjab, Shri Ravinder Pal Singh Sidhu and Secretary to the Commission, Shri Ravinder Pal Singh Sidhu was appointed as Chairman of the Commission on 9th September, 1996 for a period of six years and his term to function as Chairman of the Commission came to an end on 8th September, 2002 in terms of Article 316(2) of the Constitution. On service of notice upon him, he took the stand that he had tendered his resignation from the office of Chairman of the Commission and an affidavit was also filed before this Court to that effect on 12th August, 2002. However, it was submitted before this Court by the then Solicitor General of India that the resignation submitted by Shri Ravinder Pal Singh Sidhu was not accepted by the Government and in this regard arguments were addressed before this Court that the resignation becomes automatically effective once the provision of the proviso to Article 316(2) is complied with, that is, by submitting resignation addressed to the Governor of the State. It is further submitted that the procedure prescribed under Article 316 of the Constitution provides for the manner in which the Chairman or any other member of a Public Service Commission can resign from his office by writing under his hand addressed to the Governor and thus when this action has been put into play by the appointee, the said act of resignation is complete and becomes operative for the meaning of resign from his office; that the procedure envisaged under Article 316(2)(a) cannot be deviated so as to make any other act not prescribed in the Constitution; that the option to resign by the appointee is absolute and unilateral; that on the mere fact of writing the resignation letter to the Governor, the resignation becomes final and is operative and effective immediately upon receipt of the same by the concerned addressee. In this regard, reliance has been placed on the decision of this Court in Union of India and others vs. Gopal Chandra Misra and others, (1978) 2 SCC 301.
(3.) It was also brought to our notice that this argument need not be considered by us in view of the fact that the term of the said Shri Ravinder Pal Singh Sidhu has already come to an end on 8th September, 2002.;