SERVICE LAW – SEMINAR PAPER IV

CONDEMNATORY ANALYSIS ON THE PROTECTION AND SAFEGUARD OF

CIVIL SERVANTS UNDER THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA

SUBMITTED TO: Dr. RASHMI K.S

SUBMITTED BY

MEGANATH V

BA LLB (HONS) 2016-21, SECTION A

SEMESTER – X

Register no.16040141052

School of Law

Alliance University, Bangalore

Date of Submission: 29/03/2021

2

ABSTRACT

In India, there exists no specific judicial remedy available exclusively to Civil Servants.
Whenever an aggrieved Civil Servant wants redress he has to seek the general remedies
available to all others and there exists no privileges or special status in this regard. The
present article is an attempt to draw out the practical implication of the judicial decisions
explaining the extent and scope of judicial control in Government’s relation to Civil Service
matters. Any system of judicial control of administrative action is ultimately based on the
wider concept of the rule of law. Since the judiciary has to uphold the law of the country the
action of authority contrary to the law could be challenged in a Court of law. But the above
statement does not mean that every person whose interest is adversely affected by an
administrative order can approach the Court for redress. The role of the judicial institutions is
only sporadic and peripheral in reconciling the interests of the Government and the governed.
The masterpiece work has been to deal with various legal, constitutional and fundamental
rights of a Civil Servant. The problem of this branch of law requires besides an examination
of the rights and obligations of the Government and the Civil Servants. A study of the
remedies available to each party if the other violates the obligations imposed on him. The
enforcement of the formal rules of law on the Civil Servant is comparatively easy because the
Government being the pay-master and the holder of the power of all grades of termination of
employment up to dismissal can generally speaking act on its own.

Keywords-Constitutional Safeguards/Provision and Protection, Civil Service/Servant /Crown

Servant, Civil Post, Dismissal, Removal, Reduction in Rank, Termination of
Service/employment, Dispensing with Inquiry, Alternative Mechanisms and Judicial Control
Over Administrative Action, Article-311(2) of the Constitution of India, etc.
3

CHAPTER -1

1.1 INTRODUCTION

The Government of India is the largest employer of the people of India. The Railways
provide the most number of jobs. There are nearly 6.4 million people employed by the
Government. These do not include the jobs in Public Sector Undertakings. For the
administration and the for the government to function effectively and efficiently, a contingent
of trained civil servants is essential. The concept of Civil Service was evolved and brought in
during the British Era and still continues to be a coveted position for service. A competent
civil service is imperative for the attainment of socio-economic ideals of a welfare state. India
is the only country where the laws in relation to the Civil Services are provided in the
Constitution. The members of the Indian Civil Services were considered as the ‘steel frame’
of the British Government of India. They wanted their conditions of service to be protected
by the Constitution and the same to be followed for the civil services of Independent India.
This was done so that the services can remain independent from various political agendas.
Articles 308 to 323 of the Indian Constitution provide protection to the civil servants. The
role of civil services is extremely important in India as they help to execute the policies and
programmes of the Government. The civil servants must have qualities such as honesty,
loyalty, fairness, dynamism, impartiality and so on.

These questions are proposed to be examined in the light of the leading pronouncements of
the Supreme Court. It will be shown that the court has placed a restrictive interpretation of
Article 311 and has not been able to effectuate the true constitutional purpose for which the
provision was enacted. Government Servants/Civil Servants holds a certain responsibility,
which comes with their Post; they have to adhere with a certain kind of standard of conduct at
both in official responsibility as well as private capacity. Government Servants holds a
responsibility towards the public as well as the Government. To enforce this, there are certain
rules and regulations laid down by different acts, which describes the responsibility of
Government Servants/ Civil Servants and one of the major guidelines is Central Civil Service
Conduct (Rules) 1964.
4

1.2 RESEARCH PROBLEM

Cronyism is rampant and nepotism not uncommon especially in the process of recruitment
and promotion of Civil Servants. The present “all change” policy of the Civil Service of
politically moving officials from their current duties to other posts as a favour or disfavour is
detrimental to the effective functioning of public services. During recruitment and promotion,
attracting the best and the brightest to join the Civil Service should be the only criteria to give
impetus to the growth and dynamism of the public sector. However, politics and corruption
have proved to be a major impediment in the efficiency of Civil Servants in the public sector
in India in the contemporary era.

1.3 LITERATURE REVIEW

A brief review of the literature relating to the present study been detailed as follows:-
Harold J. Laski’s valuable treaties entitled “Parliamentary Govt. in England” &
“The Growth of Administrative Discretion” gives a wonderful account of the Home
Civil Service of England tracing down its history its relevance for the day and the impact
it has had on the English Society and politics as a whole.

Constitutional Law like Durga Das Basu’s Shorter Constitution of India and the
Introduction to Constitution of India on the Services under the Union and the State,
Dr Basu gives importance to Civil Service and interpretation, recruitment and conditions
of Service to be regulated by legislation subject to the provisions of the Constitution.

Prof. Narendra Kumar’s “Law Relating to Government Servants and Management

of Disciplinary Proceedings”. Prof. Kumar in a very simple language highlighted
Service law pertaining to certain controls like ‘the pleasure doctrine under Article 310
system of Confidential Reports, disciplinary proceedings such as suspension, removal
and dismissal from service and reduction in ranks etc.
5

1.4 SCOPE AND OBJECTIVE

 To study on practical implication of the judicial decisions explaining the extent and
scope of judicial control in Government’s relation to Civil Service matters.
 To study on the role of an administrative system for promoting transparency and
people’s participation.
 To study on the decision making, implementation and evaluation of projects
programmes and public policies for Good Governance.
 To identify the strategy that could be formulated for maintaining a balance between
the interest of the Civil Servants and that of the fundamental interest of the society
that conflict with each other.
 To suggest the necessary legislative and reforming parameters needed in this regard

1.5 RESEARCH QUESTIONS

1) How the article 311 can restrict politics and corruption in the efficiency of Civil
Servants in the public sector in India in the contemporary era?

2) Cronyism is rampant and nepotism not uncommon especially in the process of

recruitment and promotion of Civil Servants. How this issues can be solved?

1.6 HYPOTHES

Article 311 of the Constitution of India 1950 has created an environment of excessive
security and made Civil Servant largely immune from imposition of penalties for their non-
performance and Commission of crime. Article 311 of the Constitution of India 1950 is over
protective and promoting arbitrary action.All India Services Act 1951 and the concerned
rules such as Central Civil Services Conduct Rules, 1964 need a suitable amendment to cater
to the present situation and in conformity to Article – 309.
6

1.7 RESEARCH METHODOLOGY

This study is based on primary sources like The Constitution of India and various Acts, Bills,
and several case laws and secondary sources which contain journals, articles, books, etc. The
study is doctrinal, analytical, and descriptive research.

================================================================
7

CHAPTER SCHEME

================================================================

CHAPTER- 1:

1.1 INTRODUCTION

1.2 RESEARCH PROBLEM

1.3 LITERATURE REVIEW

1.4 SCOPE AND OBJECTIVE

1.5 RESEARCH QUESTIONS

1.6 HYPOTHESIS

1.7 RESEARCH METHODOLOGY

CHAPTER – 2:

2.1 JUDICIAL INDEPENDENCE

o Judicial Accountability in Judicial Independence

o balance between Judicial Independence and Judicial Accountability

o The relation between Judicial Accountability and Judicial Independence

CHAPTER – 3:
8

3.1 ISSUES IN MAKING THE JUDICIARY ACCOUNTABLE

o Judicial Accountability under the Constitution

o Difficulties in Impeachment procedure

o A series of Non-impeachment

o The Judge’s Inquiry Act, 1968

o The Judicial Standard and Accountability Bill, 2010

CHAPTER – 4:

4.1 PERFORMANCE STANDARD TO ENHANCE ACCOUNTABILITY OF THE

HIGHER JUDICIARY IN INDIA

o Corruption in Judiciary

o Impartiality and Propriety

o Equality before Law

o Integrity

o Competence and Diligence

o Separation of Powers

CHAPTER - 5:

5.1. CONCLUSION

5.2. BIBLIOGRAPHY
9

CHAPTER 2

Constitutional Protection to Civil Servants

2.1 SERVICE RULES

Article 309 talks about the recruitment and conditions of services of persons serving the
Union or any State. It states:

Recruitment and conditions of service of persons serving the Union or a State Subject to the
provisions of this Constitution, Acts of the appropriate Legislature may regulate the
recruitment, and conditions of service of persons appointed, to public services and posts in
connection with the affairs of the Union or of any State: Provided that it shall be competent
for the President or such person as he may direct in the case of services and posts in
connection with the affairs of the Union, and for the Governor of a State or such person as he
may direct in the case of services and posts in connection with the affairs of the State, to
make rules regulating the recruitment, and the conditions of service of persons appointed, to
such services and posts until provision in that behalf is made by or under an Act of the
appropriate Legislature under this article, and any rules so made shall have effect subject to
the provisions of any such Act.

The conditions of services must conform to the provisions of the Constitution that are
mandatory and cannot violate any fundamental rights.

In West Bengal Electricity Board v. Desh Bandhu Ghosh [(1985) 3 SCC 116], it was held
that the service rules providing for termination of services n three months notice on either
side was arbitrary and thus violative of Article 14.

In Moti Ram v. N.E. Frontier Railways [AIR (1964) SC 600] it was held that termination of
services of permanent employees by giving them notice for the mentioned period under Rules

2.2 CIVIL SERVICE UNDER THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA

Before a person can claim the constitutional protection afforded by article 311 the following
conditions need to be satisfied:

 that he must hold a post,

 that the post holder must be a Civil Post, and
10

 That it must be either under the Union or a State government.

In the early stages of the working of the Indian Constitution, a view prevailed that only
permanent Civil Servants could enjoy the protective umbrella provided by article 311. But in
Purshotam Lal Dhingra v. Union, [4] the Supreme Court for the first time held that the

provisions of article 311 made no distinction between a permanent and Temporary Civil
Servant. Das J. was quite emphatic in holding that to confine the scope of article 311 to
permanent Civil Servants only would invite many problems and it would be difficult to say
that a permanent Civil Servant or a Servant Officiating in a Permanent Post does not hold the
“Post”.[5] It is submitted that the interpretation of article 311 as suggested by the court is
correct and to add qualifying word to article 311 would compel us to read in the provisions
something which is not there. The expression Civil Post is not defined in the Constitution.
Article 311 omits the words “any post connected with defence’ which occur in article 310 (1).
[6] In-State of Assam v. Kanak Chandra[7] the Supreme Court held that “Civil Post” has
been used in contradistinction to a post connected with defence. Thus all Posts held by
Government Servants not connected with defence must be held to be Civil Post. In the words
of Professor Jain,[8]“a Civil Post means an appointment of office on the Civil side and
includes all personnel employed in the Civil Administration of the Union or a State. This
further implies that a member of a defence service or a civilian employed in defence services
cannot be regarded as holding a Civil Post as they hold a post “connected with defence”. The
meaning and import of the expression “Post under the Union or State” may now be
considered. It has been held that the expression “Civil Post under a State” meant that the post
was under the ultimate control of the government which if so desired could abolish it or
regulate the Conditions of Service concerning the same. However, mere payment of salary
out of the State Exchequer was not enough to categorize the post as under the state.[9]The
another view is that before a person could be regarded as holding a post under the state, it
must be shown that he is not only functioning under the direct administrative control of the
state but must be associated in activities which fall within the sphere of the Union or the
State.[10] “Except as expressly provided by this Constitution, every person who is a member
of defence or a Civil Service of the Union or an All India Service or holds any post connected
with defence or any Civil Post under the Union holds office during the pleasure of President
or the Governor of the State”.
11

The next question is: When can a Civil Servant claim the protection afforded by the
Constitution? The answer is given in article 311 (1) and (2) Clause (1) is attracted when the
Civil Servant is removed or dismissed from service while clause (2) is applicable when he is
reduced in rank. Hence, it becomes necessary to determine the meaning of the words
“dismissed” “removed” or “reduced in rank”. Broadly speaking there is no marked difference
between dismissal and a removal except that dismissal disqualifies a person from future
employment and removal does not.[11]Dismissal is thus a species or removal. Similarly
“reduction in rank” involves reversion to a post lower in rank and is in all cases removed
from the post. Hence removal from the post is an aspect of common to all the three
expressions used above. It is an admitted proposition that removal from service is, in fact,
termination of service but all cases of termination of service are not cases of removal. For
instance, termination of service may be brought about by voluntarily resigning from service
or by the abolition of a post or on the attainment of the age of superannuation. Therefore, if
the termination of service is effected by modes other than those expressed above, it may
attract the provision of article 311. 48(3) and 149(3) violated Article 311.

2.3 CIVIL SERVICE AND THE CIVIL POST IN INDIA

The Constitution of India guarantees certain protections to the Civil Servants[12] under
Article 311. The guarantees are available only when

 the concerned Civil Servant is serving as a member of a Civil Service of the Union or
an all-India service, or the Civil Service of a State, or holds a Civil Post under the
Union, or the State and;
 he is dismissed or removed or reduced in rank.[13] The constitutional protection will
not be available to him if he is not a member of the Civil Service or holder of a Civil
Post under the Union or a State Government.

So, the meaning of these expressions[14] assumes constitutional significance. Surprisingly

enough these terms have not been defined anywhere in the neither Constitution nor does the
12

Constitution give any indication to help the Court to gather their meaning. The debates in the
Constituent Assembly also do not reveal the scope of these expressions.

So a rough definition of the Civil Service would include all non-political offices and
employment held under the Crown with the exception of the armed forces.[20] That is the
body of officials in the service of the Crown who discharge duties belonging to the exercise
of the King’s executive powers but not being members of His Majesties’ naval military or air
forces and not being the holders of political officers.[21]A subordinate engaged by or
working under a civil servant is himself a servant of the Crown and not of his superior.[22]

The Constitution of India has used the terms “Civil Servant” and “person holding a Civil
Post” in contradistinction to “persons in defence service”.[23]Hence civil posts and Civil
Services are appointments or offices on the Civil Side of the administration.

The Civil Servants for the purposes of Article 311 may be classified into the following
categories.

 Regular Civil Servants of the Union.

 Members of All India Services
 Persons holding civil posts outside the regular services under the Union.
 Regular Civil Servants of the States.

Persons holding Civil Posts outside the regular services under the State Regarding classes (a)
(b)[24] and (d) much difficulty would not arise. The Union and State Governments treat them
as Civil Servants and their services are regulated by statutory rules.

The test of administrative control by the Government or control over the nature of the work
done, it is submitted, is not a sure test to determine the character of Civil Servants. For
example, in the case of a quasi-judicial authority, it is well settled that the Government has no
manner of control over the functions of such authority.

2.4 TENURE OF OFFICE (DOCTRINE OF PLEASURE)

13

The Doctrine of Pleasure plays a very major role in the consistency and on the administrative
life of a civil servant. We must have learnt that England, the Civil Servant which is duly
appointed by the assent of the Crown can be removed from his post or terminated without
assigning any reason to him.

Even if the Contract of Employment doesn't bound the Crown in any manner. This is known
as Absolute Pleasure, i.e. solely the destiny of the Civil Servant depends upon the Pleasure of
the Crown, however in actual practice the public policy is kept in mind before ascertaining
any action against any Civil Servant in England, and if it seems vital and in furtherance of
Justice than only the person is removed from his post, and not otherwise.

In India Article 310 of the Indian Constitution describes widely the pleasure exercised by the
President of India, on appointment and dis-missal of the Civil servant. The Article 310
expressly says and uses the words Except and Provided by the Constitution states that the
Civil Servant could be removed or action against him could be ensured but it must be
accordance with Constitution and Statutes being enacted in this reference. Further Article 311
of the Constitution itself places a restriction on the arbitrary removal of the State or
Authorities concerned and places a pre-condition of the necessary procedure to be
implemented before the same, which makes it quite clear that even the Civil Servant are been
given an immunity against the Arbitrary and Un-reasonable Actions of the State Authorities
or any other Authorities concerned as the case may be.

However, it must be noted that under the Fundamental Rules 56 (b) and Rule 48 of Central
Civil Services Pension Rules 1972 the Government can grant or give compulsory retirement
to the Civil Servant not as a punishment but as a Constitutionally enabling provisions subject
to the integrity and public policy. Even under the Fundamental Rules 56 (c) the Civil Servant
is having a indispensable right to voluntary retire from his post, giving a Three Months
Notice to the Government.
14

The Article 310 of the Indian Constitution even provides an enabling provision and power in
the hands of the Government to abolish a post in the Centre or the State as the case may be
however such abolition or action is always subject and is in purview of Judicial Review.

CHAPTER 3

Constitutional Remedies available to such Civil Servants under the

Statutory Provisions of Article 311

3.1 Reasonable Opportunity of being Heard:

Even the Principles of Natural Justice, Indian Evidence Act, 1872 and various
Provisions of Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 ensures that an accused or the alleged must
get an reasonable opportunity of being heard and to clarify that why a particular punishment
must not be inflicted on a particular civil servant who is charged for a crime or irregularity.

Article 311 (2) of the Indian Constitution expressly states that a civil servant cannot be dis-
missed or reduced in rank until an unbiased and fair enquiry has been conducted and
investigation is properly executed in this reference and a reasonable opportunity had been
given to such a person to defend him in front of the Disciplinary Authority or the Competent
Court of Law.

What is meant by a Reasonable Opportunity?

The ambit and purview of Reasonable Opportunity is so vast and uncertain, therefore it
cannot be confined into a particular Act or Statute, but it has to be considered having regard
to the circumstances and situations. In the most Landmark Case of Khem Chand v. Union of
India[5] Hon'ble Supreme Court of India answered this Question, in which a Government
Servant was des-missed from his service on the basis of the Report of the Enquiry Officer, in
which serious charges were framed against him.

The Defendant challenged the validity of the dis-missal on the ground that the Copy of the
Enquiry Oficer's Report is not have been given to the Defendant, and therefore he was not
aware about the charges framed against him and the findings of the Enquiry Officer in his
15

Report, which is violation of the Provisions of Article 311. It was held that it was obligatory
on the Competent Authority who passed the Order of Dis-missal to provide a copy of the
Report to the Defendant and must give him a reasonable opportunity to prove his innocence
and reason that why he must not be punished.

3.2 Termination or Reduction in Rank must lead to Punishment:

It is clear from the above provisions of Article 311, that this remedy is available only
when the Civil Servant is reduced in rank or dis-missed or has been terminated by the way of
punishment, if it is in Formal Course of Administrative Procedure or otherwise in Public
Interest or due to In-efficiency or Mis-conduct on the part of the Civil Servant than under
such circumstances this remedy cannot be availed by such civil servants.

Like in the most famous case of Parshottam Lal Dhingra v. Union of India[7] the Appellant
was appointed to officiate a Higher Post. After some time he was reverted back to his
previous place due to in-efficiency and dis-satisfaction in his workings, but it neither in any
way had affected his salary, previous rank or future chances of promotion.

Hon'ble Supreme Court of India ruled that in order to avail the remedy as constituted under
Article 311, the termination or reduction of rank must result into punishment i.e. when the
person is entitled to hold a particular post and is removed erroneously and arbitrarily or had
not been given any reasonable opportunity of being heard, here in the instant case:

 Firstly, the Appellant was merely officiating the Post, therefore he was not having
legal or constitutional right as such to hold the post, and from the situation itself it is
impliedly agreeable and reasonably force-able that the post was terminable after
giving a reasonable notice by the Government, and
 Secondly and Most significantly the civil servant was neither reduced in rank as he
was just officiating the post and neither he was terminated, dis-missed or removed
from his post as a punishment so therefore the aforesaid remedy was not available to
him under the Provisions of Article 311.

Similarly it has been held in various Judicial Pronouncements by Hon'ble Supreme Court of
India, that Suspension does not amount to punishment. Suspension is a enabling provision
under law and can be used by Government according to it's discretion and when any of the
16

civil servant is suspended he cannot claim the Right of a Reasonable Opportunity, however
he entitled to receive the minimum subsistence allowance in accordance with the provisions
of law, from which he cannot be deprived off, and appeal can be made on the basis of
irregularities or dis-satisfaction in the Procedure of Enquiry but after getting a final order
from the Enquiry Commission or other Competent Authority and not otherwise.

3.3 Compulsory Retirement must lead to Punishment:

As also referred above that in order to avail the remedy under the statutory provisions of
Article 311, even in the case of compulsory retirement, it must lead to punishment, only and
only than the civil servant can avail the remedy of the said provision.

However, premature retirement of any civil servant after completing the certain years of
Government Service or attaining a particular age in accordance with the Rules of Service of
that particular State or otherwise doesn't attract the liability under this Article. The power to
compulsorily retire a government servant is vested in the Government by virtue of the
Doctrine of Pleasure widely incorporated by the provisions of Article 310 of the Indian
Constitution.

However, the main purpose of granting such compulsory retirement is to weed out the old
dead wood and to provide opportunity to new and fresh blood in order to maintain the
efficiency and initiative skills in the administration of law and order and justice at large.

The Service Rules widely provide for the condition regarding the Compulsory Retirement of
a civil servant after attaining a particular age or completing a prescribed yeas in
Governmental Service, but while doing so the review of the Confidential Report of the Civil
Servant is minutely scrutinised in order to investigate the Mis-conduct or In-efficiency on his
part which is the most common decisive factors for the Compulsory Retirement of any Civil
Servant.
17

However, in contrary to it the Civil Servant may use any other remedy as prescribed in his
subjected Service rules but he is not at all entitled to avail the aforesaid remedy under the said
provision. The major guidelines regarding the Compulsory Retirement of a Civil Servant has
been laid down in the most famous case of State of Gujarat v. Umedbhai M. Patel [8]. by
Hon'ble Supreme Court of India are as follows:

 If the Public servant is no longer useful as an efficient personnel to the administration,

than such officers may be compulsorily retired from their services.
 If it is necessary in the public interest or any other genuine reason to retire such
officer from his services, than such decision might be taken.
 The Order must not be passed in a haphazard manner, ignoring the procedural
requirements in this reference if is it necessary to do so like the Departmental Enquiry
or the Recommendation of the Review Committee if desirable, must be done.
 Compulsory Retirement under such circumstances will not lead to Punishment and
will not at all attract any provisions of the Article 311, however remedy under the
concerned Service Rules will be available to the said civil servant.
 Any adverse entries in the Confidential Report or any Inquiry pending against the
such civil servant for any corruption charges or mis- conduct will be given
consideration and due weightage while passing such Orders.
 If the Officer is given any promotion or prominent place in the administration despite
of pending investigation against him or adverse entries in the CR, than it will be
regarded as a undue favour to the civil servant.
 Any private complaint or any un-communicated entries which might not be lodged in
the Confidential Report of the Civil Servant may be taken into consideration while
reviewing the Compulsory Retirement of the Civil Servant.

The Compulsory Retirement must not under any circumstance forfeit any right of the Civil
Servant like Pension, Gratuity and other benefits, neither in any way must impose any
monetary punishment or penalty on him.

It is widely regarded that with reference to the above said Guidelines the Civil Servant may
be given compulsory retirement if the Authorities or the than Government thinks fit to do so,
18

acting in the periphery of the Guidelines, Procedures, Service Rules and Discretionary
Powers vested in the Government, which must lead to punishment in any way as contrary to
it will attract the provisions of Article 311.

3.4 EXCEPTIONS OF ARTICLE 311 OF THE INDIAN CONSTITUTION

The Article 311(2) provides immunity and protection to the civil servants from extraneous
and excessive punishment, but on the same hand they are having some exceptions being
attached to it, under which the provisions and remedies as stated in the Article 311 are not
available to the concerned Civil Servant, neither he can avail it

Conviction on a Criminal Charge:

If a Civil Servant is dis-missed or reduced in rank or is terminated on the ground of his

conviction held under any Criminal Charge, than under such circumstances he cannot avail
the remedy of reasonable opportunity as stated in the provisions of Article 311.

As the readers might be knowing that there is Doctrine that for availing a remedy or seek
redressal under Court of Law He must come with clean hands. Therefore, if the particular
civil servant himself is not bonafide and justofied on his part that he cannot seek remedy
under at-least this provision due to his wrongful conduct and involvement in the conduct of
Moral Turpitude.

It was held in the famous case of K. Venkateshwarlu v. State of A.P.[9] that were under a
trial if a Civil Servant is convicted by the Court, than under such circumstances it is obvious
that the Disciplinary Proceedings are bound to follow him, but even if he is held as acquitted
than also Departmental Enquiry can be conducted against him, if his acquittal is other than
honourable.

Where it is not practicable to hold Inquiry:

19

If the concerned authority is satisfied or thinks fir that in National Security or in Public
Interest it is necessary to dismiss or remove a civil servant from his post, than under such
circumstances the concerned must record that particular thing in writing and after that it is not
reasonably necessary or required to hold such inquiry.

Like in the case of Jaswant Singh v. State of Punjab[10] Hon'ble Supreme Court of India
ruled that making baseless considerations and claims that the appellant would cause harm and
injury to the witnesses or will cause problems in the Departmental Enquiry, in the absence of
any concrete evidences are baseless and un-acceptable. Therefore the Dismissal Order against
the Appellant was set aside and he was re-instated on his post with all the necessary
allowances and due salaries from the date of dis-missal.

Even the Article 311 expressly provides some exceptions in it's provisions where the
Doctrine of Audi Alteram Partem i.e. Principles of Natural Justice doesn't applies, like when
the appropriate authority like the President or Governor of the State is satisfied that it is
feasible to remove the Civil Servant from his post due to Public Interest, Public Good or
Public Policy than this remedy is not available under such circumstances. Like when a Civil
servant was convicted by the Court for causing injury to his superior under such
circumstances giving a chance to the civil servant is not reasonably practicable as his mis-
conduct is clearly visible.

It was contended that even after such mis-conduct the remedy is not available to the
concerned civil servant under the provisions of Article 311, but even than two more remedies
are available to them apart from these, they are:

 The Civil Servant can make an Appeal before his Department to a superior or
Principal Secretary of the Department, as he is having wide statutory powers been
vested in him for granting relaxation to the aggrieved civil servant under such
circumstances.
 he doors of Judiciary is always open for such person, but not under Article 311, but
under Article 32 or Article 226 in the form of Judicial Review, now the Court will
20

decide that weather the punishment imposed was arbitrary or excessive or weather the
procedure adopted was rightful or is merely hypothetical and un-warranted by facts
and required evidences.

Proceedings beyond proof of reasonable doubt is not applicable:

In the Disciplinary Proceedings being instituted against any civil servant the proof beyond a
reasonable doubt will not apply. It must follow a sense of reasonableness and must not be
hypothetical and too remote to be exercised or happened. Even what could a prudent man
could have done in reasonable circumstances must be considered before reaching on any
conclusion, there must be active evidences against the concerned officers otherwise the
investigation cannot be regarded as valid and justified.

Quantum of Punishment must be Reasonable and Acceptable:

It is a noted fact that, the punishment being awarded to the Civil Servant for his mis-conduct
or wrongful deed rests with the concerned Investigating Officer or the Disciplinary Authority,
however the Judiciary has clearly told that the punishment must not be excessive and un-
reasonable to the ratio of the crime committed otherwise the validity and acceptability of the
said order is supposed to be challenged under the Court of Law for extraneous punishment
which is totally un-warranted.

From all of the above exceptions, the remedy stated under this Article is available to the
concerned civil servant, on the condition that his dis-missal or reduction in rank must lead to
punishment.