The Supreme Court on Thursday sought the response of the Central government to a public interest litigation (PIL) petition seeking declaration that any Constitutional functionary who resigns from his office to avoid removal shall not be entitled to any perks, amenities, facilities and entitlements that are attached to the office of which he is holding.

A bench of Chief Justice of India (CJI) Surya Kant and Justices Joymalya Bagchi and V Mohana issued notice to the government on a plea by one Pratik Vira flagging the trend of Constitutional functionaries resigning from office to avoid removal.

“It is the respectful submission of the Petitioner that those Constitutional functionaries under the Constitution who tender their resignations, whether to avoid any proceedings of removal or proceedings for no confidence motion should not be entitled to the perks and all other incidental facilities attached to the constitutional office from where they have resign,” the plea said. According to the petitioner, there seems to be a general feeling amongst common citizens that Constitutional functionaries somehow try to avoid any proceedings after which they would be removed from their offices and to frustrate such proceeding they tender their resignation.

However, even after submitting such resignation they continue to get all the perks, facilities etc.attached to the office they hold. Such practice is strictly unfair, unconstitutional and therefore deserves to be intervened by this Court, the plea added. “As per the petitioner,

‘Such practice is an anathema to the constitutional grievance and is directly contrary to the rule of law which is a very basic structure of the Constitution of India.’

No Constitutional functionary should be allowed to take benefit of any perk, amenities or facilities when he / she tenders resignation in the midst of their constitutionally prescribed tenure. Instead, such Constitutional functionaries should be mandated to complete their tenure and face any consequences of such departmental proceedings along with," it was contended.

While non-Constitutional functionaries have specific rules which talk about not permitting such functionaries to resign if they are facing departmental proceedings. However there is nothing on similar lines for Constitutional functionaries, the plea said.

The position of a Constitutional functionary is supposed to be much higher than that of a non-Constitutional functionary and they should set examples by exhibiting the highest standards of probity in public life by completing their tenure and facing the proceedings of removal like any other employee who work for this great nation,” it further contended.

Hence, it was prayed that any provision, interpretation which allows a Constitutional functionary to be entitled with the perks, amenities and facilities even after resignation which is tendered to avoid removal should be declared unconstitutional.

Advocates Sangramsingh R Bhonsle, Pushkara A Bhonsle, Sneha S Bhonsle, Sanmitra YP, Shruti Sharma and Bhramjyot Singh appeared for the petitioner.