In Brief
A retired government engineer challenged disciplinary proceedings initiated against him, contending that only the Governor could sanction such proceedings under Regulation 351-A of the Civil Services Regulations, 1975, not a departmental Minister. The High Court quashed the proceedings, holding that the Governor's power under Article 309 cannot be delegated via general Business Rules framed under Article 166. The Supreme Court split 1-1: Chief Justice Thakur allowed the appeal, holding disciplinary action is an executive function properly allocable to Ministers under Article 166(3), making the Minister's sanction valid. Justice Gopala Gowda dissented, reasoning that Articles 166(3) and 309 operate in distinct fields and require express delegatory evidence under Article 309 specifically.
The lawyer headnote and full judgment text are available to registered users.