JUSTICE K K NARENDRAN Vs. STATE OF KERALA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner, on March 17, 1990, was sworn in as a member of the Kerala Public Men's Corruption (Investigation and Inquiries) Commission by the Governor of the State of Kerala. The Commission gets constituted under the Kerala Public Men's Corruption (Investigations and Inquiries) Act, 1987 (hereinafter referred to as the said 'Commission' and 'the Act').

(2.) Since at the hearing, counsel restricted his submission to the legal rights following his appointment on March 17,1990, on the basis of the legal position only, concentrating only on prayers (ii) and (iv) of the petition, shorn off all details and background stated in the petition, consideration and consequent decision would centre round the legal position, in the circumstances.

(3.) It is urged that the Act confers certain rights and privileges, at the same time, attaches certain disabilities to a member of the Commission appointed under the Act. Petitioner accepted the appointment as a member of the Commission in terms of the provisions contained in the Act. It is submitted that S.6 of the Act contains a clear provision that the allowances payable and other conditions of service of a member of the Commission shall not be varied to his disadvantage after his appointment. The conditions of service contained in S.6(1) of the Act prescribe that a member appointed shall hold office for a term of five years from the date on which he enters upon his office or till he attains the age of 70 years, whichever is earlier, it is urged that the petitioner is entitled to continue as a member till 22-8-1993 when he attains the age of 70 years, and he can be removed only under procedure laid down under S.7 of the said Act, for proved misbehaviour and / or incapacity. It is urged that the appointment conferred certain right and privileges, and also as well, attached certain disabilities. Therefore, it is urged, any interference with the appointment otherwise than under the provisions of the Act under which the petitioner was appointed would amount arbitrary exercise of power which is violative of Art.14 & 16(1) of the Constitution.