Karnataka HC quashes Governor’s order suspending KPSC Chairman, directs reinstatement within 7 days

The Karnataka High Court on Tuesday quashed the State Governor’s July 10 order suspending Karnataka Public Service Commission (KPSC) Chairman Shiva Shankarappa S Sahukar and directed the State to reinstate him within 7 days [Shiva Shankarappa S Sahukar v, The Special Secretary].

Justice Suraj Govindaraj held that the suspension order could not be sustained since the constitutional process prescribed under Article 317 of the Constitution for removal of chairperson was not adhered to.

The Court directed that upon reinstatement, Sahukar would be entitled to receive all consequential service and monetary benefits.

However, the Court restrained Sahukar from influencing any decision of the Commission against his daughters.

"It is however made clear this judgement makes the clear the constitutional validity of the impugned order of suspension and does not decide one way or the other the truth or otherwise the allegation against the petitioner or his daughters," the Court directed.

The Court clarified that fresh action could be taken against Sahukar only on the basis of the prior aid and advice of the Council of Ministers.

"It will be open to the competent Constitutional authorities to proceed afresh if so advised strictly in accordance to the Constitution and the law declared in this judgement that is on the prior aid and advice of the council of ministers that the order of suspension under Article 317(2) can be made."

The KPSC Chairman was suspended on allegations of having facilitated the selection of both his daughters into government employment. Sahukar's daughters had secured selection to government jobs under Category 3B (a reserved category) while the Chairman himself was part of the selection process. To secure reservation benefits, they produced an income certificate showing their father's annual income as ₹40,000 despite his salary being around ₹2.71 lakh per month.

As per a report, it is also alleged they secured a caste certificate to claim benefits under Other Backward Classes exempt from creamy layer benefits.

Sahukar had approached the High Court challenging the Governor’s order of suspension under Article 317(2).

Senior Advocate M Arun Shyam, appearing for Sahukar, argued that the Governor lacked jurisdiction to invoke Article 317(2) since no reference had been made by the President of India to the Supreme Court under Article 317(1).

Sahukar’s plea contended that Article 317 establishes a two-stage constitutional mechanism governing the removal and suspension of the Chairman or members of a State Public Service Commission.

Under Article 317(1), the President is required to refer allegations against the Chairman or a member of a State Public Service Commission to the Supreme Court for an inquiry. The petition argued that no such constitutional process had been initiated before the Governor passed the suspension order.

The petition was filed through Advocate R Dileep Kumar Gowda.

Advocate General K Shashikiran Shetty appeared for the State government.

Senior Advocate Uday Holla, assisted by Advocate K Abhishek Kumar, represented the Secretary to the Governor.

A detailed judgment is awaited.