Question: Discuss critically the provisions in the Constitution of India guaranteeing protection to Civil Servants. A is a Constable in the India Police Force. On receipt of information, an inquiry is held, by his superior officer Y, into charges of corruption and dishonesty against him and ultimately, A’s case is sent for final disposal to a Tribunal specially… Read More »

Question: Discuss critically the provisions in the Constitution of India guaranteeing protection to Civil Servants. A is a Constable in the India Police Force. On receipt of information, an inquiry is held, by his superior officer Y, into charges of corruption and dishonesty against him and ultimately, A’s case is sent for final disposal to a Tribunal specially appointed to deal with such cases. Y in the meantime is appointed a member of this Tribunal. The Tribunal decides against A,...

Question: Discuss critically the provisions in the Constitution of India guaranteeing protection to Civil Servants. A is a Constable in the India Police Force. On receipt of information, an inquiry is held, by his superior officer Y, into charges of corruption and dishonesty against him and ultimately, A’s case is sent for final disposal to a Tribunal specially appointed to deal with such cases. Y in the meantime is appointed a member of this Tribunal. The Tribunal decides against A, chiefly on the basis of his previous report and he is dismissed from service. He approaches you for advice. Please draft your advice. [BJS 1979]

Find the answer to the mains question only on Legal Bites. [Discuss critically the provisions in the Constitution of India guaranteeing protection to Civil Servants. A is a Constable in the India Police Force. On receipt of information, an inquiry is held, by his superior officer Y, into charges of corruption and dishonesty against him and ultimately, A’s case is sent for final disposal to a Tribunal specially appointed to deal with such cases. Y in the meantime is appointed a member of this Tribunal. The Tribunal decides against A, chiefly on the basis of his previous report and he is dismissed from service. He approaches you for advice. Please draft your advice. [BJS 1979]

Answer

The present illustration is the facts from the case of Joti Parshad Ram Kirpal vs Superintendent of Police, [AIR 1956 P H 102]. The High Court in this case said although as per Article 311 a Government servant should not be dismissed without being furnished a reasonable opportunity of defending himself, nor should he be victimized and deprived of the rights of a fair trial.

But there are many borderline cases in which the Court should hesitate to interfere if only because cases of misconduct of Government servants are extremely difficult to prove and it is very seldom that a false charge is made the subject matter of a departmental inquiry. Based on the facts enquired by the Inspector General, the court observed that there has not been any manifest injustice to the petitioner because he only behaved in a most indiscipline and objectionable manner.

However, the Constitution of India through Article 311 protects and safeguards the rights of civil servants in Government service against arbitrary dismissal, removal, and reduction in rank.

Article 311 (1) says that no government employee either of an all-India service or a state government shall be dismissed or removed by an authority subordinate to the owner that appointed him/her.

Article 311 (2) says that no civil servant shall be dismissed or removed or reduced in rank except after an inquiry in which he has been informed of the charges and given a reasonable opportunity of being heard in respect of those charges.

Clearly, Article 311(2) provides of reasonable opportunity of being heard. The above proposition is well illustrated in the case of State of Bombay v. Saubhag Chand M. Doshi [AIR 1957 SC 892]. The Supreme Court observed that policy underlying Article 311 (2) which provided for giving an opportunity to be heard was that when the action was proposed to be taken against a Civil Servant by way of punishment which would result in loss of benefits already earned by him he should be given an opportunity to show cause against such order.

In the present case, even though the first inquiry was held by the Superior Officer ‘Y’ when the matter reached before the tribunal, ‘Y’ was already appointed as the member of the tribunal for the disposal of the case. Here, the principle of natural justice, the rule against bias comes into the picture. The rule against bias states that no one should be a judge in his own case, and here it is clear the Y has a sufficient interest in the case of X and therefore, the decision given by him regarding termination of X from its position in any condition would be deemed as arbitrary and hence a violation of Article 311.


Important Mains Questions Series for Judiciary, APO & University Exams

  1. Constitutional Law Mains Questions Series Part-I
  2. Constitutional Law Mains Questions Series Part-I
  3. Constitutional Law Mains Questions Series Part-II
  4. Constitutional Law Mains Questions Series Part-IV
  5. Constitutional Law Mains Questions Series Part-V
  6. Constitutional Law Mains Questions Series Part-VI
  7. Constitutional Law Mains Questions Series Part-VII
  8. Constitutional Law Mains Questions Series Part-VIII
  9. Constitutional Law Mains Questions Series Part-IX
  10. Constitutional Law Mains Questions Series Part-X
Updated On 2021-06-27T07:26:00+05:30
Admin LB

Admin LB

Next Story