H S BALI Vs. NASIRULAH BEG

JUDGEMENT

(1.) IN order to check, prevent and eradicate corruption from services under the State, the State Legislature passed Act No. XI of 1962, being the Jammu & Kashmir Government Servants Prevention of Corruption (Commission) Act (hereinafter to be referred to as the principal Act). By virtue of this Act the legisla ­ture constituted a high powered commission to inquire into char ­ges of various forms of corruption against servants in the employ of the Government. The Commission was to be composed of a Chairman and one or more members. Ever since the Commission has been set up under the Act, it has all along been presided over by a retired Chief Justice of a High Court and the members appointed were retired or serving District Judges. In order to facilitate the work of the Commission, the statute made provision for an investigating agency to work under the orders of the Commission and investigate into cases of corruption referred to it by the Commission. The Commission was to have a quasi - judicial procedure and would act after framing charges against a parti ­cular delinquent and recording evidence in support of the pro ­secution as also that of the defence. The Commission could then either exonerate a delinquent or send on its report to the Governor.

(2.) ONE of the harshest and the most rigorous provisions in the Act of 1962 was that the moment a charge was framed by the Commission against a Government servant, he was to be placed under suspension immediately. This was provided by S. 12(5) of the principal Act which runs thus: -

(3.) THE Government, however, realized that the provision left no discretion to the Commission to recommend the suspen ­sion of the delinquent and, therefore, in order to soften the rigour of this provision by Act VI of 1965 the provision relating to sus ­pension under S. 12(5) was amended thus: -