minister should resign if he cannot support the decision of the cabinet

117. In R.K. Jain vs. Union of India109, this Court was concerned with a public interest litigation relating to the functioning of the Customs, Excise and Gold Control Appellate Tribunal. At that time the office of the President of the Tribunal was lying vacant for over six months. But after rule nisi was issued in the first writ petition, the   Government   appointed   someone   as   the   President   of   the Tribunal. Immediately, a second writ petition was filed challenging the appointment and also some of the recruitment rules relating to 109(1993) 4 SCC 119 142 the appointment.The file relating to the appointment was produced in a sealed cover and the Government claimed privilege in terms of Section 123 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872 and Article 74(2) of the Constitution. While dealing with the executive power of the President and the role of the Council of Ministers, K.Ramasamy, J., said “The principle of ministerial responsibility has a variety of   meanings   precise   and   imprecise,   authentic   and   vague”. Paragraphs 29 and 30  of the report  in  R.K.  Jain  (supra)  may be usefully extracted as follows: “29. It would thus be held that the Cabinet known as Council of Ministers headed by Prime Minister under Article   75(3)   is   the   driving   and   steering   body responsible for the governance of the country. They enjoy the confidence of the Parliament and remain in office so long as they maintain the confidence of the majority. They are answerable to the Parliament and accountable   to   the   people.   They   bear   collective responsibility and shall be bound to maintain secrecy. Their   executive   function   comprises   of   both   the determination of the policy as well as carrying it into execution, the initiation of legislation, the maintenance of order, the promotion of social and economic welfare, direction of foreign policy. In short the carrying on or supervision of the general administration of the affairs of Union of India which includes political activity and carrying   on   all   trading   activities,   the   acquisition, holding and disposal of property and the making of contracts   for   any   purpose.   In   short   the   primary function of the Cabinet is to formulate the policies of the   Government   in   conformity   with   the   directive principles of the Constitution for the governance of the nation;   place   the   same   before   the   Parliament   for 143 acceptance and to carry on the executive function of the State as per the provisions of the Constitution and the laws. 30. Collective  responsibility  under  Article  75(3)  of the   Constitution   inheres   maintenance   of confidentiality as enjoined in oaths of office and of secrecy   set   forth   in   Schedule   III   of   the Constitution  that   the   Minister   will   not   directly   or indirectly   communicate   or   reveal   to   any   person   or persons   any   matter   which   shall   be   brought   under his/her   consideration   or   shall   become   known   to him/her as Minister except as may be required for the “due discharge of his/her duty as Minister”. The base and   basic   postulate   of   its   significance   is unexceptionable.   But   the   need   for   and   effect   of confidentiality   has   to   be   nurtured   not   merely   from political   imperatives   of   collective   responsibility envisaged   by   Article   75(3)   but   also   from   its pragmatism.” 118.    In paragraph 33 of the report  in  R.K.   Jain,  this Court indicated that the Cabinet as a whole is collectively responsible for the advice tendered to the President and for the conduct of business of each of his/her department. The question as to what happens when   an   individual   Minister   is   in   total   disagreement   with   the collective decision of the Cabinet was also spelt out in R.K. Jain in the following words: “33.  ...Each   member   of   the   Cabinet   has   personal responsibility to his conscience and also responsibility to the Government. Discussion and persuasion may diminish  disagreement,  reach  unanimity,  or   leave it  unaltered.  Despite  persistence  of  disagreement, 144 it is a decision, though some members like it less than   others.   Both   practical   politics   and   good government   require   that   those   who   like   it   less must still publicly support it. If such support is too great   a   strain   on   a   Minister's   conscience   or incompatible   to   his/her   perceptions   of commitment   and   he/she   finds   it   difficult   to support the decision, it would be open to him/her to  resign. So the price of the acceptance of Cabinet office   is   the   assumption   of   the   responsibility   to support   Cabinet   decisions.   The   burden   of   that responsibility is shared by all.”