Case Law Details
Sanjay Vs The State of Maharashtra (Bombay High Court)
In the present case, absolutely no reason is forthcoming, nor the respondents have come with case as to what was the cause for terminating the Part Time Chairmanship of the petitioner. The State Government can only exercise this power on the basis of any relevant and strong material to suggest that continuation of such member would not be in public interest. There should be reason for removal of member.
The powers of removal of the office-bearers of statutory board is to be exercised, firstly to ensure that the circumstances exist for the exercise of powers of removal and to safeguard the institution from continuation of such office-bearers.
As observed above, no reason has been set out by the State Government for removal of petitioner, when the admitted position is that the removal of the petitioner is on account of Doctrine of Pleasure. The law laid down by the Hon’ble Apex Court in case of P. Singhal (supra) would clearly apply to the facts of case that withdrawal of pleasure cannot be at the sweet will, whim and fancy of the authority but can only be for valid reasons. Mere using the word public interest can not become a ground for removal of petitioner from the Board. There should be valid reasons for removal.
FULL TEXT OF THE JUDGMENT/ORDER OF BOMBAY HIGH COURT
Please become a Premium member. If you are already a Premium member, login here to access the full content.
