BENGALURU: Observing that the issue deserves serious attention in as much as a public interest element and democratic significance under the Constitution, the Karnataka High Court on Friday sought a response from the State government and all those holding ‘office of profit’ due to their appointments to various boards and corporations, and as political secretaries and advisers.
A division bench of Chief Justice NV Anjaria and Justice MI Arun issued notice to the State government and other respondents appointed heads of boards and corporations and advisers, and directed them to submit their responses.
“The issues in the petition bear constitutional and democratic importance. It would require a definite response from the State government and other respondents,” the court said, directing them to submit their reply before March 18, and adjourning the hearing of the petition filed by Suri Payala, engineer-in-chief level officer at the Karnataka State Pollution Control Board, to March 27.
Senior counsel Sai Deepak, representing the petitioner, submitted that the State government has appointed 42 MLAs and MLCs between June 1, 2023, and January 26, 2024, to posts heading boards and corporations, with the benefit of cabinet rank ministers and all pecuniary benefits.
This amounts to conferring the status of cabinet rank itself on them, which is against Article 164(1)(A) of the Constitution, which caps the total number of ministers, including the chief minister, at 15 per cent of the total number of members in the Legislative Assembly.
However, the 48 appointments exceed 15 per cent of members of the Assembly. It is a serious public issue since it’s a drain on the public exchequer, he argued.
Advocate-General (AG) K Shashikiran Shetty submitted that a similar issue had cropped up before the coordinate bench of the court in the Umapathy versus State of Karnataka case.
The arguments sought to be canvassed then were that violation of Articles 164 and 161 were dealt with negatively. Sai Deepak argued that the appointments were also a direct infringement of Article 191 of the Constitution read with provisions of the Karnataka Legislature (Prevention of Disqualification) Act, 1956.
Meanwhile, AG questioned the locus of the petitioner, alleging that he filed the petition as he was not appointed chairman of the KSPCB by the state government. However, the court kept the issue open.