Chairperson / President / Member of Tribunals / Statutory Authorities /
Commission already contain a provision prohibiting the appointees from
taking up any other work / assignment. We may also take notice of the fact
that even in the absence of any such provision in the statute, the letters of
appointment are often found to contain the same as a condition of service.
However, there is a lacuna in this regard vis-a-vis some of the statutes /
appointments and which is now sought to be filled with the Bill aforesaid.
The same has resulted in appointees of some of the Tribunals /
Statutory Authorities / Commissions being barred / not entitled to take up
arbitrations, while others are entitled to the same and who otherwise are
similarly placed. It is precisely to remedy such a situation that amendments
to the existing legislations / new legislation are/is proposed. However, the
said process, inspite of our waiting for the last nearly five years, has not
yielded any fruit.
We find that otherwise it is a settled principle of law that a full time
employee, as certainly full time Chairpersons / Presidents / Members of
Tribunals / Commissions / Statutory Authorities are, is not entitled to take
up any other employment or vocation and as certainly an arbitration would
constitute. The reason therefor is obvious. A whole-time employee is
expected to bestow all his time, energy and resources to the whole time
employment and not to divert the same to any other job, work or vocation.
Moreover, retired Judges appointed as Chairpersons or Members of
Statutory Bodies, Tribunals and Commissions discharge judicial / quasijudicial
functions and their involvement in any other commercial legal
activity or as arbitrators would necessarily require them to interact, in all
possibility, with the same set of people / professionals who appear before
them in their capacity as Chairperson / Member of the Statutory Body /
Tribunal of which they are whole time office holder, giving rise to
speculation about their impartiality in discharge of their duty in such
capacity. It would thus be seen that it is no argument or consideration that the
whole time Chairperson / Member would be acting as arbitrator only during
the hours he / she is not working as Chairperson / Member. Not only would
pursuing such a vocation / occupation simultaneously with the office
occupied, be at the cost of the work of the said office but may also
jeopardise / appear to jeopardise the reputation of the said office. It is also a
settled principle, that justice not only must be done but must seem to be
done.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
Date of decision: 11th December, 2015
W.P.(C) 866/2010
COMMON CAUSE
Versus
THE UNION OF INDIA .
CORAM:
HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV SAHAI ENDLAW
