Outgoing Governor asks President to remove PSC chairman, members for 'misbehaviour'

A week before he left office, former Kerala Governor Rajendra Arlekar had written to President Droupadi Murmu recommending the removal of Kerala Public Service Commission chairman M R Baiju and its 15 members.

Top sources in Kerala Lok Bhavan said the recommendation was sent on October 15, a week before he left office on October 23. Never before has a Governor taken such an extraordinary step against the PSC. Only the President has the power to remove a PSC chairman or member from office.

The President's power to remove the chairman and members of the PSC flows from Article 317 of the Constitution. On receiving a recommendation of 'misbehaviour' from the Governor, the President can refer the recommendation to the Supreme Court. The apex court, based on the reference made by the President, will order a judicial probe. If the judicial enquiry finds merit in the allegations, the Supreme Court can recommend the removal of the PSC chairman or members. The President will be bound by this recommendation.

A top Lok Bhavan source said that during the period of the enquiry, the PSC chairman and members could be put under suspension. Under Article 316, which deals with PSC appointments, the members can hold office for six years.

The Governor's report on 'misbehaviour' and recommendation of removal was based on the alleged irregularities in various examinations conducted under the present PSC. The PSC itself had admitted to grave errors in the evaluation of one such examination, a common test conducted for three Kerala Planning Board posts: Chief (Industry & Infrastructure), Chief (Perspective Planning Division) and Chief (Plan Co-ordination Department).

In the economics test conducted for the Planning Board posts, there were 228 answer sheets to be evaluated. The ninth question in 177 answer sheets and questions 10 to 18 in all 228 answer sheets were not assigned to experts for evaluation or have not been evaluated. The PSC made appointments from rank lists drawn up from these partially evaluated mark sheets. The mistake came to light when the third rank holder, K Shyam Krishnan, invoked the Right to Information Act to secure his answer sheet. A Crime Branch probe is currently on in this case.

Significantly, the Governor had made his recommendation to dissolve the present PSC after the Special Investigation Team probing the PSC's Planning Board recruitment anomaly told the High Court that it had received 180 complaints of irregularities against the PSC. After preliminary scrutiny, the SIT felt that at least nine of them called for detailed investigation.

The Governor is also said to have mentioned the non-cooperation of the PSC members with the Crime Branch probe. On October 5, ten days before the Governor made his recommendation, the High Court had questioned the non-cooperation of the Board members.

"Why you are not cooperating with investigation? You have a case as per the writ petition itself that what you have done is as per the order, etc. Then you go before them, give a statement, produce the documents. You justify your actions in terms of law. You are well aware of the fact that interrogation or questioning of the accused is one among the vital stage of investigation. So you must cooperate. You are being called for getting information, not arrayed as an accused," Justice A Badharudeen said while hearing the PSC plea against the FIR filed by the Crime Branch.

The Board's contention is that the alleged irregularity of partial evaluation was not deliberate but a mere clerical error. The government, on the other hand, called it an "innovative fraud".

Opposition Leader Pinarayi Vijayan has termed the Governor's move "illegal, a violation of Constitutional norms and a profound misuse of power".

Pinarayi said that the Governor could not recommend the removal of the PSC chairman and members as long as the Supreme Court had not conducted any enquiry into the activities of the PSC. "No such investigation by the Supreme Court had taken place in Kerala," Pinarayi said.

"Such a recommendation by the outgoing Governor is one of a piece with the illegal interventions he had been making in Kerala during his stint as Governor," Pinarayi said. He also wanted to know whether the UDF government was supportive of the Governor's move. "The government will have to pay a heavy price if it has any thought of directly or indirectly supporting the Governor's move," Pinarayi said.