Tweet
Centre lashes Maya
The Centre has opened a battlefront against Uttar Pradesh Chief Minister Mayawati in the Supreme Court by rejecting her choice of a non-IAS officer to head State administration as unconstitutional.
With the appointment of Shashank Shekhar Singh as State Cabinet Secretary being questioned in a PIL before the Supreme Court, the Department of Personnel and Training in an affidavit on Monday felt that this decision of the Mayawati Government had “undermined” the established system of governance in the country. It further demoralised the IAS cadre in the State who have been compelled to work under fear or threat of the executive.
The scathing affidavit filed on Monday led the Supreme Court to wonder if appointment to such a public office could be abused in this manner. The Bench of Justices BS Chauhan and TS Thakur said, “This is a public office. There has to be some rules guiding the appointment. How do you just pick up somebody and appoint him to this post, especially when this post is a regular Government service.”
For the PIL petitioners, Harish Chandra Pandey and Amrendra Nath Tripathi, who were represented by senior advocate Abhishek Manu Singhvi, it was added joy since the Court echoed their objections and the Centre supported them.
Senior advocate Gopal Subramanium, who appeared for Shekhar, argued that the matter raised a vital question of law that may decide the course of administrative appointments made throughout the country. But the Court sought to draw a distinction. It said, “One can understand if a person is an expert in a field and you appoint them as advisors.
Here it is a regular post.” Subramanium sought time to file a reply causing the matter to be posted after a week.
Support for Shekhar poured in from the State Government which justified the decision to appoint him as Cabinet Secretary. Disputing the fact that such post existed only at Centre and not in State, senior advocate Rakesh Dwivedi, who appeared for the State Government said, “Since 1954 the post has existed and the Chief Secretary is ex-officio appointed to this post.”
But the DoPT affidavit opposed this stand. Finding fault with the appointment of Cabinet Secretary in state, Director (Services) of DoPT Deepti Umashankar said, “Creation of ex-cadre post of Cabinet Secretary in a State is ex-facie unreasonable, legally impermissible, and otherwise objectionable as it tends to undermine the time-tested system of administration and uniformity in the structure of governance….for appointment of civil servants as envisaged in Article 312 of Constitution.”
As per convention, Cabinet Secretary is the head of administration at Centre and Chief Secretary at the State level. With a non-IAS officer Shekhar made to sit over the Chief Secretary with all its powers vested in him, such an arrangement would allow any person to enjoy all powers without commensurate accountability. This would undermine the structure of administration and subject IAS officers to feel insecure.
The Centre has opened a battlefront against Uttar Pradesh Chief Minister Mayawati in the Supreme Court by rejecting her choice of a non-IAS officer to head State administration as unconstitutional.
With the appointment of Shashank Shekhar Singh as State Cabinet Secretary being questioned in a PIL before the Supreme Court, the Department of Personnel and Training in an affidavit on Monday felt that this decision of the Mayawati Government had “undermined” the established system of governance in the country. It further demoralised the IAS cadre in the State who have been compelled to work under fear or threat of the executive.
The scathing affidavit filed on Monday led the Supreme Court to wonder if appointment to such a public office could be abused in this manner. The Bench of Justices BS Chauhan and TS Thakur said, “This is a public office. There has to be some rules guiding the appointment. How do you just pick up somebody and appoint him to this post, especially when this post is a regular Government service.”
For the PIL petitioners, Harish Chandra Pandey and Amrendra Nath Tripathi, who were represented by senior advocate Abhishek Manu Singhvi, it was added joy since the Court echoed their objections and the Centre supported them.
Senior advocate Gopal Subramanium, who appeared for Shekhar, argued that the matter raised a vital question of law that may decide the course of administrative appointments made throughout the country. But the Court sought to draw a distinction. It said, “One can understand if a person is an expert in a field and you appoint them as advisors.
Here it is a regular post.” Subramanium sought time to file a reply causing the matter to be posted after a week.
Support for Shekhar poured in from the State Government which justified the decision to appoint him as Cabinet Secretary. Disputing the fact that such post existed only at Centre and not in State, senior advocate Rakesh Dwivedi, who appeared for the State Government said, “Since 1954 the post has existed and the Chief Secretary is ex-officio appointed to this post.”
But the DoPT affidavit opposed this stand. Finding fault with the appointment of Cabinet Secretary in state, Director (Services) of DoPT Deepti Umashankar said, “Creation of ex-cadre post of Cabinet Secretary in a State is ex-facie unreasonable, legally impermissible, and otherwise objectionable as it tends to undermine the time-tested system of administration and uniformity in the structure of governance….for appointment of civil servants as envisaged in Article 312 of Constitution.”
As per convention, Cabinet Secretary is the head of administration at Centre and Chief Secretary at the State level. With a non-IAS officer Shekhar made to sit over the Chief Secretary with all its powers vested in him, such an arrangement would allow any person to enjoy all powers without commensurate accountability. This would undermine the structure of administration and subject IAS officers to feel insecure.
Comment