The Central government on Thursday told the Supreme Court that the public interest litigation (PIL) seeking to deny post-resignation perks and amenities to constitutional functionaries, including judges, who quit to avoid removal proceedings, appeared to have merit [Pratik Vira v Union of India].
Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, appearing for the Central government, acknowledged before a Bench of Chief Justice of India (CJI) Surya Kant and Justice Joymalya Bagchi that the petitioner, one Pratik Vira, appeared to have made out a case.
He then undertook to obtain instructions and file a response.
The Court, subsequently, allowed an intervention application and directed the Union government to file its counter-affidavit.
Earlier, the plea had come up before the Supreme Court on September 3. The Court had sought the response of the Central government then.
The petitioner moved the Court arguing that constitutional functionaries, who face removal proceedings, often resign to avoid removal/ impeachment. By doing so, they also ensure that they continue to enjoy the perks and facilities attached to their former offices.
As per the petitioner, there is a general perception among citizens that constitutional functionaries resign to frustrate proceedings that could lead to their removal, but continue to receive the benefits attached to their offices even after stepping down.
Such a practice is contrary to the rule of law, which forms part of the basic structure of the Constitution, it was submitted.
In case of non-Constitutional functionaries, there are specific rules which do not permit such functionaries to resign if they are facing any departmental proceedings, the plea said.
The position of Constitutional functionaries should be much higher than non-Constitutional functionaries and they must demonstrate probity in public life by completing their tenure and, if required, facing the proceedings of removal like any other employee working for the nation, it was contended.
Hence, it was submitted that any provision which makes a Constitutional functionary entitled to perks, amenities and facilities even after resignation (tendered to avoid removal) should be declared as unconstitutional.
Advocates Sangramsingh R Bhonsle, Pushkara A Bhonsle, Sneha S Bhonsle, Sanmitra YP, Shruti Sharma and Bhramjyot Singh represented the petitioner.
[Read Live Coverage]