GURSEWAK SINGH HARNAM SINGH Vs. THE STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is a petition under Article 226 by Fsewak Singh. The Petitioner alleged that he a permanent member of the Education Service if the State. He was, suspended by the Government by their order dated 4 -9 -1951 and an inquiry was started against him on the following two charges:

(2.) THAT he made a false statement in his above - mentioned application.

(3.) BEFORE discussing the effect of these orders upon the point which is now before me I may mention that the learned Advocate General argued that the orders of the Chief Minister and the Education Minister could not be used in evidence in the case for other reasons, viz., one, that they constituted merely an advice given by the Ministers to the Rajpramukh and, two, that they were not properly authenticated as rcquhed by Article 166 of the Constitution. I have no hesitation in holding that both the contentions are wholly devoid of force. It is true that it is the privilege and the right of the Ministers, including the Chief Minister, to tender their advice to the Rajpramukh in certain matters upon which the latter alone can make the final orders, but a large number of cases are disposed of by the Ministers in charge of their respective departments and though the orders made by thorn are described as those of the Rajpramukh the Rajpramukh need not and, in fact, does not know anything about them.