TaxTMI Login
AI OCR ✕Convert scanned orders, printed notices, PDFs and images into clean, searchable, editable text within seconds. Starting at 2 Credits/page
Try Now →Just a moment...
AI OCR ✕Convert scanned orders, printed notices, PDFs and images into clean, searchable, editable text within seconds. Starting at 2 Credits/page
Try Now →
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
Use comma for multiple locations.
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
of 
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
All Case Laws
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: (i) Whether an order of dismissal passed under Article 311(2)(c) of the Constitution is amenable to judicial review on the grounds of mala fides or reliance on wholly extraneous or irrelevant considerations. (ii) Whether, in such a challenge, the Government is bound to place the relevant material before the Court or Tribunal, subject to privilege under the Evidence Act, and whether the nature of the employee's activities must be disclosed even if the supporting records are privileged.
Issue (i): Whether an order of dismissal passed under Article 311(2)(c) of the Constitution is amenable to judicial review on the grounds of mala fides or reliance on wholly extraneous or irrelevant considerations.
Analysis: The power under Article 311(2)(c) is founded on the President's or Governor's satisfaction that, in the interest of the security of the State, it is not expedient to hold an inquiry. That satisfaction is not beyond judicial scrutiny. The limits of review are narrow, but the Court can examine whether the satisfaction is vitiated by mala fides or based wholly on irrelevant or extraneous grounds. The standard applied is comparable to the limited review recognised in constitutional matters involving high executive satisfaction, while respecting the sensitivity of matters touching security of the State.
Conclusion: The order under Article 311(2)(c) is justiciable on the limited grounds of mala fides and wholly extraneous or irrelevant considerations.
Issue (ii): Whether, in such a challenge, the Government is bound to place the relevant material before the Court or Tribunal, subject to privilege under the Evidence Act, and whether the nature of the employee's activities must be disclosed even if the supporting records are privileged.
Analysis: Effective judicial review requires the Court or Tribunal to have access to the relevant basis of the satisfaction, except where a specific claim of privilege under Sections 123 and 124 of the Evidence Act succeeds. Article 74(2) protects the advice tendered by Ministers, but not the underlying material. Even where particular documents are withheld on privilege grounds, the Government must still disclose the nature of the activities said to justify action under Article 311(2)(c), so that the nexus with the security of the State can be tested. On the facts, the Tribunal's acceptance of privilege and its conclusion that the material related to security of the State, not to the appellants' association activities, was upheld.
Conclusion: The Government must produce the relevant material subject to privilege, and must disclose the nature of the alleged activities even where documents are withheld; the privilege claim and the Tribunal's findings were upheld.
Final Conclusion: The dismissal orders were not shown to be vitiated by mala fides or by wholly extraneous or irrelevant grounds, and no interference with the Tribunal's decision was warranted.
Ratio Decidendi: An order under Article 311(2)(c) is subject to limited judicial review for mala fides or extraneous considerations, and the Government must place the relevant material before the adjudicating forum subject to a valid privilege claim, while still disclosing the nature of the activities relied upon.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
