ANITHA A SHETTY Vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF POLICE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD Mrs. Thadani the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned AGP for the State.

(2.) THE learned AGP undertakes to place the record and proceedings before me relating to the impugned order dated 12/6/2006 passed by the Appellate Authority on the next date.

(3.) INSPITE of this well settled position, the Minister for Home signs the quasi judicial orders as Deputy Chief Minister (Home). Needless to mention, the post of Deputy Chief Minister is unknown to our Constitutional scheme and, therefore, the designation used for administrative convenience should not be used while discharging the quasi judicial functions as per the business rules framed under Article 166 of the Constitution. This view is reinforced with the decision of the Supreme Court in the case of M.T. Khan vs. Government of Andhra Pradesh [(2004) 2 SCC 267] while dealing with the interpretation of Article 165 regarding the appointment of the Advocate General.