By Muskan Goel
Published On: October 26, 2021 at 16:30 IST
Introduction
Remember when we were asked to follow the rules back in school times and as kids we just used to assume that after becoming an adult we wouldn’t be asked to follow such rules? Well we certainly realize by now that it was a mere assumption.
Everyone in all the spheres of life, old or young, have to follow rules. Not just adults but public servants including policemen, firemen etc. also follow certain rules and if they disobey them, they are served with punishment.
This article elaborates on the disciplinary action that can be taken against Public Servants along with the procedure laid down for the smooth functioning of the same.
Who is a public servant?
Technically a public servant is a person holding a government office or job. This can either be in the form of elections or appointments. They work for the elected government and the citizens. Certain examples of people who are known as public servants: policemen, fire-fighters, judges etc.
What are Disciplinary rules for public servants?
Basically, disciplinary rules are mandatory regulations/rules stating the minimum level of professional conduct which is expected from a professional so as to avoid being subject to disciplinary action. Disciplinary rules for public servants are those rules which state the basic behaviour/professionalism that a public servant is expected to conduct while on duty.
- Where are the above mentioned rules specified?
The disciplinary rules for public servants are mentioned under The All India Services (Discipline and Appeal) Rules, 1969[i], which was exercised in accordance to the powers conferred by sub-section (1) of Section 3 of All India Services Act, 1951[ii].
Another act that talks about such rules/conduct is The All India Services (Conduct) Rules, 1968[iii], which was again exercised in accordance to the powers conferred by sub-section (1) of Section 3 of All India Services Act, 1951.
- What are the various kinds of rules that are mentioned in the list of AIS Rules?
The list of AIS Rules mentions innumerable rules for the conduct of all public servants falling under any category. Here are certain examples of the rules that are to be followed by the public authorities:
- Section 7 of The All India Services (Leave) Rules, 1955[iv], states the maximum period/duration of absence from duty that is available to a public servant.
- Section 6 of The All India Services (Provident Fund) Rules, 1955[v], mentions the conditions and rate of subscription for a subscriber of P.F.
- The All India Services (Prevention of Sexual Harassment) Regulations, 1998[vi], governs the various aspects of sexual harassment along with steps for its prevention.
- Section 4 of The Indian Administrative Service (Recruitment) Rules, 1954[vii], mentions the method of recruitment of the IAS.
- Section 3 of The All India Services (Conduct) Rules, 1968, states the general conduct expected out of a public servant.
What happens if the public servants fail to comply with the rules?
If a public servant fails to comply with the rules, court proceedings are taken against him thereby called as disciplinary proceedings against public/government servants. The Article 309 of the Indian Constitution[viii] gives power to the state to regulate disciplinary proceedings against government servants.
Under the proviso to article 309 of the Indian Constitution, the president has framed rules called the Central Civil Services (Classification, Control and Appeal) Rules, 1965[ix], which regulate disciplinary proceedings against persons appointed to serve under the union/government, also known as public servants.
The proceedings derive its sanction from Article 311 of the Indian Constitution[x].
What is the procedure for disciplinary proceedings against public servants?
Disciplinary Proceedings are initiated against a government/public servant who is alleged to have committed misconduct. The case can be filed in the Public Services Tribunal only after an adverse order has been passed against a government/public servant.
The disciplinary authority and may conduct a preliminary inquiry as and when required by appointing a preliminary inquiry officer to look into the alleged charges against the public servant, without their knowledge. If the public servant is found to be guilty by the preliminary inquiry officer, then a charge sheet can be filed against the servant and a full-fledged departmental inquiry starts to take place.
After the full-fledged departmental inquiry, if the servant is prima-facie found to be guilty, the inquiry officer is required to submit the inquiry report to the disciplinary authority along with all records and evidences.
Initiation of the case takes place when an impugned punishment order (questioning order) is passed against the servant. The legal battle is initiated by the public servant when he/she files a petition in the Public Services Tribunal, challenging the order. Both the parties are then required to prove their side, with all the required evidences, affidavits etc.
In the petition filed by the aggrieved servant, he/she aims to show that the proceedings conducted against him/her were unjust and unfair, and that he has not committed any kind of misconduct. Whereas, the disciplinary authority has to prove that the inquiries, evidences against the alleged servant are just and valid on the grounds of commission of misconduct by that particular servant.
Case Laws
- Prem Nath Bali Vs Registrar High Court of Delhi & Anr[xi]
Facts: The appellant and respondent (2) worked in the same place. The appellant had filed a complaint of misconduct during work, against the respondent. The respondent had in return filed a complaint of misbehaviour against the appellant. After the officer-on-duty passed the complaint/statement of the respondent to the district judge due to which the appellant was ordered suspension without inquiry.
The disciplinary proceedings started immediately but continued for 9 years, owing to huge losses faced by the appellant. The appellant pleaded removal of suspension, but his plea was dismissed by the district and high courts, after which the appellant finally made a plea in the supreme court if India.
Held: It was held by the Hon’ble Supreme Court, that in cases where the servant is placed under suspension during the pendency of inquiry, the inquiry should conclude within the shortest possible time (6 months as an outer limit).
- Shanta Kumar Vs Centre of Scientific and Industrial Research & Ors.[xii]
Facts: The petitioner had filed a complaint against respondent 3 for misconduct with her at workplace, but due to certain loop-holes/delays the complaint couldn’t be forwarded to the concerned authorities at the right time. Later, when the complaint reached the authorities, the term ‘sexual harassment’ was added to the complaint. The authorities confirmed with the petitioner and she claimed that all charges against the respondent were valid and shall be perused in totality.
Held: The court after looking into the evidences held, that holding of arm was not an act subjected to sexual harassment but was a mere situation of altercation, and hence the petitioner was free of the allegations of sexual harassment.
- H.M. Singh Vs Union of India[xiii]
Facts: The petitioner was eligible for promotion to the post of Lt. General from Major General. Due to the availability of various tasks with the DRDO, the meeting for selection of the candidate for the post of Lt. General got delayed and was held around the time of petitioners’ retirement date. The President of India had given an extension of service to the petitioner at the time when the meeting was convened. Due to this extension, the petitioner could not get selected for the post of Lt. General and thus filed an appeal in the Supreme Court of India.
Held: It was held, that in situations wherein an officer attains the age of retirement and who is granted extension in service cannot claim consideration for promotion to a higher post.
- Union of India Vs B.V. Gopinath[xiv]
Facts: The respondent was served with a charge sheet where it was alleged that the respondent had bribed the P.A. of the then Minister of State (Revenue), for transfer and promotion. The respondent filed an appeal in the High Court claiming that the charge-sheet / charge-memo was not sanctioned by the finance minister and thus lacked the approval of any disciplinary authority. The High Court granted the plea and thus the charge-sheet was quashed. The appeal was then filed in the supreme court by the appellant (UOI)
Held: It was held that, since the charge-sheet lacked the signature of the finance minister/disciplinary authority, it was right to quash the charge-sheet and thus the respondent was free from all the charges.
- UCO Bank & Ors. Vs Rajendra Shankar Shukla[xv]
Facts: The respondent had issued a cheque seven years from the date he was served with the charge-sheet for misconduct during work. However, the respondent retired during the process of departmental/disciplinary inquiry but due to the departmental/disciplinary inquiry pending against him, he was not paid his salary, pension and other financial grants, along with which he was also not given a fair chance to represent himself.
Held: The Apex Court held that and employee is entitled to subsistence allowance even if there is an inquiry pending against him/her. Along with that it was held that access to justice is a valuable right, the servant might as well be guilty of misconduct but that was no ground to deny pension or subsistence allowances.
Conclusion
The rules meant for all are to be followed by all. Anyone who has disobeyed any rule gets entitled to serve punishment, be it a common man or any public servant/government official. The judicial system of India is developing at a faster pace, the result of which are the tribunals that serve justice in particular type of cases, just like the Public Service Tribunal, which deals with cases relating to disciplinary proceedings against government/public servants.
ABOUT THE AUTHOR
Muskan Goel is a student of BA.LLB at Vivekananda School of Law and Legal Studies (VSLLS, VIPS). She believes that hard work is necessary for success but smart work is the ultimate mantra for success. She readily adjusts according to the environment and always strives for perfection. She also believes that everyday brings a new opportunity for her to learn new things.
Edited by: Aashima Kakkar, Associate Editor, Law Insider
[i] The All India Services (Discipline and Appeal) Rules, 1969
[ii] All India Services Act, 1951 (61 of 1951)
[iii] The All India Services (Conduct) Rules, 1968
[iv] The All India Services (Leave) Rules, 1955
[v] The All India Services (Provident Fund) Rules, 1955
[vi] The All India Services (Prevention of Sexual Harassment) Regulations, 1998
[vii] The Indian Administrative Service (Recruitment) Rules, 1954
[viii] The Constitution of India, 1950, Article 309
[ix] Central Civil Services (Classification, Control and Appeal) Rules, 1965
[x] The Constitution of India, 1950, Article 311
[xi] Prem Nath Bali Vs Registrar High Court of Delhi & Anr 16 December, 2015 CIVIL APPEAL No.958 OF 2010
[xii] Shanta Kumar Vs Centre of Scientific and Industrial Research & Ors. 31 October, 2017 W.P.(C) 8149/2010
[xiii] H.M. Singh Vs Union of India, (2014) 3 SCC 670
[xiv] Union of India Vs B.V. Gopinath, (2014) 1 SCC 351)
[xv] UCO Bank & Ors. Vs Rajendra Shankar Shukla 15 February, 2018 CIVIL APPEAL NO. 2693 OF 2013