AIR 1982 SUPREME COURT 1407 ::1982 CriAppR(SC) 327 ::1982 (3) SCC 200 ::1982 (45) FacLR 272 ::45 FacLR 272 ::1982 (2) LabLN 663 ::1982 SCC(Cri) 686 ::1983 SCC (L&S) 1 ::(1982) 2 LabLJ 281 ::1982 (2) ServLJ 551 SC ::1982 (8) All LR 665 ::(1982) 2 ServLJ 551 ::(1983) 1 Crimes 49 ::1982 (2) SCWR 148 ::(1982) SC Cr R 357

Supreme Court Of India

(From : Punjab)

Hon'ble Judge(s): A. P. Sen, E. S. Venkataramiah, R. B. Misra , JJJ

(A) Prevention of Corruption Act (2 of 1947) , S.6(1)(c)— Sanction to prosecute - Authority competent to remove - Can be higher in rank to appointing authority - Prosecution of Sectional Officer (Overseer) in Punjab Public Works Department whose appointing authority was Chief Engineer - Sanction accorded by Chief Minister, held, was not invalid. Constitution of India , Art.311(1)— Punjab Public Works Department (Irrigation Branch) Overseers Engineering State Service, Class III, Rules (1955) , R.8— Section 6 (1) (c) stipulates that the removing authority will be the sanctioning authority. In view of Art. 311 (1) of the Constitution the removing authority cannot be subordinate in rank to the appointing authority. By necessary implication the removing authority may be higher in rank to the appointing authority.(Para 11) Rule 8 of the Punjab Public Works Department (Irrigation Branch) Overseers Engineering State Services. Class III, Rules 1955, however provides that the appointing authority of the Sectional Officer is the Chief Engineer. Therefore removing authority could not be inferior or subordinate in rank to the Chief Engineer in view of Art. 311 (1) of the Constitution. The Chief Minister concerned is not inferior or subordinate to the Chief Engineer. Under Art. 311 the authority to remove should not be subo....