Is the post of Chairperson of the Backward Classes Commission an office of profit?: Kerala High Court answers [Read Judgment]

The Kerala High Court on Tuesday quashed a challenge to the appointment of retired Kerala High Court Judge G Sasidharan as the Chairman of the Kerala Backward Classes Commission..The Bench of Chief Justice S Manikumar and Justice Shaji P Chaly was hearing quo warranto petition moved by one, S Subramaniam, assailing the former Judge’s appointment on the ground that he was a former Upa Lokayukta. .Section 5(3) of the Kerala Lokayukta Act bars a Lok Ayukta or an Upa Lok Ayukta from taking further employment to any office of profit under the Government or in any authority, corporation, company, society or university under the purview of the Lokayukta Act..That the position of Chairman of the Kerala Backward Classes Commission was an office of profit was the crux of Subramaniam’s contentions..The petitioner submitted the following in support of his averments:.The Judge exercised a public, quasi-judicial position to further social justice in his role as Chairman of the Backward Classes Commission, therefore it was an office.The position was a public office since the recommendations of the Backward Classes Commission were usually binding on the State and it was endowed with the power to summon and conduct inquiries.Section 16 of the Act deemed the Officers of the Commission as Public Servants within the meaning of Section 21 of the Indian Penal Code.He drew a salary from either the Consolidated Fund of India or the Consolidated Fund of Kerala, and the terms and conditions of office, salary, duration of tenure etc. were controlled by the State Government..With these submissions, it was argued by the petitioner that the post of Chairperson of the Backward Classes Commission was an Office of Profit. .Since the Backward Classes Commission Act did not specifically make an exception for persons who were otherwise disqualified from holding the post of Chairperson, the Judge continued to be disqualified, it was averred..Referring to the Parliament (Prevention of Disqualification) Act, 1959, the petitioner argued that the said Act specified that even government offices are offices of profit. Seeking to draw an analogy, the petitioner claimed that the position of Chairperson was also an office of profit barred by the Kerala Lokayukta Act..Rejecting the contention, the Bench held that merely because the Government could remove Members of the Commission in certain enumerated situations, it does not render the post of the Chairman of the Backward Classes Commission an office of profit. .The Court disagreed with the argument that the Chairperson of the Kerala State Commission for Backward Classes is under the employ of the Government. The Bench explained, ."Merely because, sub-section (3) of Section 3 in the Kerala State Commission for Backward Classes Act, 1993, provides for removal of persons from the Office of Members, for the reasons stated thereunder, that by itself cannot be said that the Government have a control over the Backward Class Commission... when the advice of the Commission is binding on the Government, the Commission cannot be said to be under the control of the Government. ".In view of this finding, the Court found that the other contentions failed as well..On these terms, the petition was dismissed..Read the Judgment here: