K C CHANDY Vs. R BALAKRISHNA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) According to the petitioner, on May 25, 1985, at a public meeting at Ernakulam, the respondent, then a Minister in the Kerala Cabinet, incited the people to resort to terrorism and to wage a war against the Union of India on the 'Punjab model', to achieve their objectives. On June 4, 1985, the petitioner,' who is stated to be a citizen who believes in upholding the sovereignty and integrity of the country, filed this writ for the issue of an information in the nature of quo warranto preventing the respondent from exercising the authority of his office, on the ground that the public speech alleged to have been made by him on May 25, 1985, amounted to breach of oath taken by him at the time of his assuming the office of the Minister, and, therefore, he had forfeited his right to continue in that office. On June 5, 1985, the learned Judge before whom the writ petition came up for admission, ordered issue of notice, making, at the same time, some observations. On the same day, the respondent tendered his resignation which was accepted by the Governor. In the counter affidavit filed by the respondent, he has denied the allegation that he incited the people to wage a war against the Union of India on the 'Punjab model', for achieving their objective. Ext. P1 is a copy of the 'Financial Express' dated 3-6-1985 carrying the report of the speech alleged to have been made by the respondent on May 25, 1985.

(2.) The main questions that fall for decision in this writ petition are: (1) whether breach of oath committed by a Minister would be a constitutional impediment for his continuance in office; and (2) whether, in such circumstances, a writ of quo warranto or an information in the nature of quo warranto would be issued from this Court.

(3.) Art.164 (3) of the Constitution lays down: