Supreme Court Plea Seeks Cancelling Perks, Facilities For Constitutional Functionaries Who Resign To Avoid Removal
Supreme Court has been told that continued perks and facilities is an anathema to the constitutional grievance and is directly contrary to the rule of law.
Supreme Court issues notice on plea against Constitutional Functionaries who tender their resignations, to avoid any proceedings of removal or proceedings for no confidence motion, being entitled to the perks and all other incidental facilities.
The Supreme court today has issued notice in a petition seeking a declaration that any Constitutional Functionary who tenders his resignation to avoid being removed shall not be entitled to any perks, amenities, facilities and entitlements.
A CJI Surya Kant led bench today has issued notice in a PIL by one Pratik Vira.
The plea also seeks to declare that any provision which makes a Constitutional Functionary entitled to perks, amenities and facilities even after mid tenure resignation just to avoid being removed as unconstitutional and ultra vires Article 14 of the Constitution of India.
"If a Constitutional Functionary is either elected or appointed for a particular tenure, it is his constitutional obligation to complete the tenure and discharge the constitutional obligation imposed by such election or appointment. Wherever a Constitutional Functionary, whether elected or appointed, is to be removed, the Constitution always prescribes a separate procedure so as to ensure that such high Constitutional Functionaries are not removed as per either the whims of any individual or on petty grounds," the plea argues.
Court has further been told high constitutional office necessarily imposes an unwritten constitutional obligation upon such Constitutional Functionaries either to complete their tenure or to face a transparent procedure of removal and as such an easy option of resigning to avoid removal is neither contemplated nor desirable. These kinds of resignation defeat the confidence which the Constitution places upon the High Constitutional Functionaries, the petitioner argues.
"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 resigned. This aspect is of crucial importance to bring the probity in public life, transparency, accountability and constitutional behaviour," the petition states.
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, court has been told.
Drawing a parallel, the plea clarifies that in case of Non-Constitutional Functionaries, there are specific rules which do not permit such functionaries to resign if they are facing any departmental proceedings which may lead to punishment being imposed upon them including the punishment for removal.
"There is a general feeling amongst all right-thinking individuals that the Constitutional Functionaries are not treated at par with others though both of them serve the nation in their respective capacities. The common man perceives such opportunistic resignations with disdain and an unprincipled device to avoid discharging constitutional duties," the plea submits.
Case Title: PRATIK VIRA Vs UNION OF INDIA
Bench: CJI Kant, Justice Bagchi and Justice Mohana
Hearing Date: September 3, 2026