PART 14: Constitution Of India

PART XIV: SERVICES UNDER THE UNION AND THE STATES

CHAPTER I: SERVICES

Article 308: Interpretation.

• Plain English: This is a “dictionary” clause for Part XIV. It defines what “State” means in this specific part (which deals with government employees).
• The Rule: It says that for the purposes of this Part, the term “State” does not include the State of Jammu and Kashmir.
• Real-World Example: This (now historical) provision meant that the rules in this part of the Constitution for creating all-India services or the rules for State Public Service Commissions did not automatically apply to J&K, which had its own separate constitution and rules for its state government employees. (Note: This article was based on the text of Article 370 and has been effectively superseded by the constitutional changes of 2019).

Article 309: Recruitment and conditions of service of persons serving the Union or a State.

• Plain English: This article explains who has the power to make the rules for government employees (their hiring, pay, promotion, pension, etc.).
• Main Clause: The “appropriate legislature” (Parliament for Union employees, and the State Assembly for State employees) has the power to pass an “Act” (a law) to regulate all these conditions.
• Proviso (The Most Important Part): This is the exception that is used 99% of the time. It says that until the legislature passes such an Act, the President (for Union employees) or the Governor (for State employees) has the power to make “Rules” to regulate these conditions.
• Real-World Example:
  • Union: The President, on the advice of the government, issues the “Central Civil Services (Conduct) Rules,” which all central government employees must follow. These “Rules” are the law unless Parliament passes an “Act” to override them.
  • State: The Governor of a state, on the advice of the state Cabinet, issues the “State Civil Services (Pension) Rules.” These rules, made under the proviso of Art. 309, legally govern how and when a state government employee gets their pension.

Article 310: Tenure of office of persons serving the Union or a State.

• Clause (1):
  • Plain English: This establishes the “Doctrine of Pleasure.” It’s a concept from the British system. It states that, in theory, every government employee holds their job “during the pleasure” of the President or Governor.
    • Defence & Union Civil Service: Hold office “during the pleasure of the President.”
    • State Civil Service: Hold office “during the pleasure of the Governor.”
  • Crucial Detail: This “pleasure” is not absolute. It is heavily restricted by Article 311, which (as we will see) states that a civil servant cannot be dismissed without a formal inquiry. So, this “pleasure” does not mean “fire at will.”
  • Real-World Example: This doctrine is why a government employee can be dismissed from service (after a due inquiry under Art. 311) without the government being sued for “breach of contract.” The government argues that there is no “contract,” only service “at pleasure.”
• Clause (2):
  • Plain English: This provides a special exception for people who are not regular civil servants but are hired under a special contract because of their unique, “special qualifications.”
  • The Rule: The government can make a contract with such a person that includes a compensation clause. This clause would require the government to pay them a penalty if their post is abolished early or if they are fired for reasons other than misconduct.
  • Real-World Example: The government wants to hire a world-class cybersecurity expert from the private sector to lead a new project for 5 years. The expert, who is not a civil servant, demands a contract. The government, using this article, signs a contract that says, “If this project is cancelled before 5 years, you will be paid one year’s salary as compensation.” This is a legal exception to the “Doctrine of Pleasure.”

Article 311: Dismissal, removal or reduction in rank of persons employed in civil capacities under the Union or a State.

This is one of the most important articles for the bureaucracy. It is a “constitutional shield” that provides job security to civil servants, protecting them from arbitrary or politically motivated dismissal. It is the major exception to the “Doctrine of Pleasure” mentioned in Article 310.

• Clause (1):
  • Plain English: A civil servant (at the Union or State level) cannot be dismissed or removed by an authority that is subordinate (lower in rank) to the authority that appointed them.
  • Real-World Example: A person is “appointed” to a state police service by the Director-General of Police (DGP). An order for their dismissal cannot be issued by a lower-ranking officer, like a local Superintendent of Police (SP). The dismissal order must come from the DGP or an officer of equivalent or higher rank (like the State Home Secretary).
• Clause (2):
  • Plain English: This is the core protection. It says that no civil servant shall be dismissed, removed, or “reduced in rank” (demoted) except after a formal “inquiry” (a departmental investigation) in which:
    • They have been formally informed of the “charges” against them (e.g., “Charge 1: Corruption,” “Charge 2: Absenteeism”).
    • They have been given a “reasonable opportunity of being heard” in respect of those charges.
  • Real-World Example: A government department wants to fire an officer for alleged corruption. It cannot fire them on the spot. It must first:
    • Issue a formal “charge sheet.”
    • Appoint an “Inquiring Authority.”
    • Allow the officer to submit a written defense, produce their own witnesses, and cross-examine the department’s witnesses.
      Only after this entire “due process” is completed can a punishment be given.
• Proviso to Clause (2):
  • Plain English: This proviso clarifies that while the full inquiry into the charges is mandatory, once the person is found guilty in that inquiry, a punishment can be imposed “on the basis of the evidence adduced during such inquiry.” It is not necessary to give them a second chance to make a representation against the punishment itself.
  • Real-World Example: The inquiry finds an officer guilty of corruption. The Disciplinary Authority (e.g., a Secretary) can then decide the punishment is “dismissal” based on the inquiry report. They do not have to go back to the officer and ask, “We are proposing to dismiss you, what do you have to say about this specific punishment?” The “opportunity to be heard” was during the inquiry into the facts, not on the penalty.
• Second Proviso to Clause (2) [The Exceptions]:
  • Plain English: This proviso lists three exceptions where the full “inquiry” process is NOT required before firing a civil servant:
  • (a) [Criminal Conviction]: Where a person is dismissed because of their “conduct which has led to his conviction on a criminal charge.”
    • Real-World Example: A government clerk is convicted in a court of law for taking a bribe (a criminal charge). The government can then dismiss them from service immediately based on the court’s judgment without conducting a new, separate departmental inquiry.
  • (b) [Not Reasonably Practicable]: Where the authority in charge is satisfied that it is “not reasonably practicable” to hold the inquiry. The authority must record its reasons for this in writing.
    • Real-World Example: This is very rare. An officer in a remote border area actively incites a mob against their own colleagues, and the situation is so violent and chaotic that no witness is willing or able to testify in a formal inquiry. The government might invoke this clause, record in writing why an inquiry is not possible, and dismiss the officer.
  • (c) [Security of the State]: Where the President or the Governor is satisfied that holding such an inquiry is “not expedient in the interest of the security of the State.”
    • Real-World Example: A senior official is discovered by intelligence agencies to be actively spying for a hostile foreign power. Holding a public inquiry would mean revealing secret evidence and compromising national security. The President, on the advice of the government, can issue an order dismissing the official immediately under this clause, and the reason does not have to be disclosed.
• Clause (3):
  • Plain English: If a question arises about whether it was “reasonably practicable” to hold an inquiry (as per exception (b) above), the decision of the authority in charge of the dismissal is final.
  • Real-World Example: The officer dismissed under exception (b) cannot simply sue the government on the grounds that “it was practicable to hold an inquiry.” The court will generally accept the authority’s written decision as final, as long as it’s not completely baseless.

Article 312: All-India services.

• Clause (1):
  • Plain English: This is the constitutional basis for creating the “All-India Services” (like IAS, IPS) — elite cadres that serve both the Union and the States.
  • The Process: If the Rajya Sabha (the Council of States) declares, by a resolution supported by a two-thirds (2/3) majority of members present and voting, that it is “necessary or expedient in the national interest” to create a new All-India Service…
  • …then Parliament gets the power to pass a law to create that service.
  • Crucial Detail: The power to initiate the creation of a new All-India Service rests only with the Rajya Sabha, as it is the body that represents the “States.” This article also allows for an “all-India judicial service.”
• Clause (2):
  • Plain English: This is a “grandfather” clause. It says that the Indian Administrative Service (IAS) and the Indian Police Service (IPS), which were created before the Constitution began, are deemed to be services created by Parliament under this article. This gave them constitutional status from day one.
• Clause (3):
  • Plain English: This clarifies that the “all-India judicial service” (if created) cannot include any post that is lower in rank than that of a District Judge (as defined in Article 236).
• Clause (4):
  • Plain English: A law creating the all-India judicial service can include amendments to Chapter VI of Part VI (Subordinate Courts) to make the new service work.

Article 312A: Power of Parliament to vary or revoke conditions of service of officers of certain services.

• Plain English: This is a historical article. It deals with the “Secretary of State’s Services” — the old British-era officers (like the ICS – Indian Civil Service) who were still in service after the Constitution began.
• The Gist: This article gave Parliament the power to change or cancel the special pay, pension, and disciplinary rights that were guaranteed to these officers by the British. The original Constitution (in Art. 314) had protected their old privileges. This article (added by the 28th Amendment) removed that protection, allowing Parliament to bring them in line with the new pay scales and rules of the IAS.
• Proviso: This protected any of these old officers who had subsequently been appointed to high posts (like Supreme Court Judge, High Court Judge, CAG, or UPSC Chairman) from any disadvantageous change after their appointment.

Article 313: Transitional provisions.

• Plain English: This is another “continuity” clause. It says that all the old, pre-1950 laws governing public services (like the “Civil Service Rules”) will continue to be in force, unless they are inconsistent with the new Constitution. They will remain valid until they are replaced by new laws (under Art. 309).
• Real-World Example: The old “Fundamental Rules” (FR) and “Supplementary Rules” (SR) that governed pay and leave for British-era employees were continued in force after 1950 and still form the basis of service conditions for many government employees today, as they are not inconsistent with the Constitution.

Article 314: [Provision for protection of existing officers of certain services.]

• Plain English: This was the original article that protected the privileges of the old ICS officers.
• Status: It was REPEALED and REMOVED by the 28th Amendment Act, 1972, and replaced by the new Article 312A (which did the opposite and removed their privileges).

CHAPTER II: PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSIONS

Article 315: Public Service Commissions for the Union and for the States.

• Clause (1):
  • Plain English: This article formally establishes the independent bodies responsible for government recruitment:
    1. There shall be a Union Public Service Commission (UPSC) for the Union (central) government.
    2. There shall be a State Public Service Commission (SPSC) for each individual state.
  • Real-World Example: The UPSC conducts the all-India Civil Services Exam (for IAS, IPS, IFS). The MPSC (Maharashtra Public Service Commission) conducts exams for state-level jobs in Maharashtra.
• Clause (2):
  • Plain English: This allows two or more states to agree to have one “Joint” commission. This can be done if the legislatures of all those states pass a resolution, and then Parliament passes a law to create the Joint State Public Service Commission (JPSC).
  • Real-World Example: For a time, the states of Punjab and Haryana had a Joint Commission after they were first separated.
• Clause (3):
  • Plain English: The law passed by Parliament to create a JPSC will also include all the necessary rules for how it will operate.
• Clause (4):
  • Plain English: The UPSC can, if the Governor of a state requests it and the President approves, agree to handle the recruitment for that state as well.
  • Real-World Example: A very small, new state might not have the resources to set up its own SPSC. The Governor can request the UPSC to conduct its state-level recruitment exams for the first few years.

Article 316: Appointment and term of office of members.

• Clause (1):
  • Plain English: The President appoints the Chairman and members of the UPSC (and JPSC). The Governor of a state appoints the Chairman and members of that state’s SPSC.
• Proviso:
  • Plain English: This is a key qualification rule. At least half (as nearly as may be) of the members of any PSC (UPSC or SPSC) must be people who have held a government office (Union or State) for at least 10 years.
  • Real-World Example: If the UPSC has a Chairman and 8 members (9 total), at least 4 of them must be “service” members (e.g., retired IAS, IPS, or Army officers). The other 4 can be “non-service” members (e.g., academics, lawyers, or technical experts).
• Clause (1A):
  • Plain English: If the Chairman’s office is vacant (or they are on leave), the President (for UPSC) or Governor (for SPSC) can appoint one of the other members of the commission to be the “acting Chairman.”
• Clause (2):
  • Plain English: This sets the term of office for a PSC member:
    • Term: 6 years from the date they take office.
    • Retirement Age: Or until they reach 65 years of age (for UPSC) or 62 years of age (for SPSC/JPSC), whichever is earlier.
  • Real-World Example: A person is appointed to the UPSC at age 60. They will not serve for 6 years. Their term will end in 5 years, when they turn 65. If another person is appointed at age 55, they will serve the full 6-year term and retire at 61.
• Clause (3):
  • Plain English: When a member finishes their 6-year term, they are ineligible for reappointment to that same post. (But, as per Art. 319, they can be appointed to a higher post, e.g., a member can become Chairman).

Article 317: Removal and suspension of a member of a Public Service Commission.

This article makes it very difficult to fire a PSC member, to ensure their independence.

• Clause (1):
  • Plain English: The only way to remove the Chairman or a member of any PSC (UPSC or SPSC) for “misbehaviour” is through a special process:
    • The President must make a “reference” (a request) to the Supreme Court to investigate the member.
    • The Supreme Court must hold a formal inquiry (like a trial).
    • If the Supreme Court “reports” that the member ought to be removed, the President must then issue the order of removal.
  • Key Detail: A Governor cannot fire an SPSC member. They can only report the matter to the President, who then must refer it to the Supreme Court.
• Clause (2):
  • Plain English: While the Supreme Court inquiry (under Clause 1) is pending, the President (for UPSC) or the Governor (for SPSC) can suspend the member from working.
• Clause (3):
  • Plain English: This lists three exceptions where the President can fire a member immediatelywithout any Supreme Court inquiry:
    • (a) if the member is declared “an insolvent” (bankrupt) by a court.
    • (b) if the member, while in office, takes up any other paid job.
    • (c) if the President is of the opinion that the member is “unfit to continue in office” due to “infirmity of mind or body” (e.g., a serious medical condition).
• Clause (4):
  • Plain English: This defines “misbehaviour.” A member is guilty of misbehaviour if they get involved in any government contract or agreement in a way that gives them a personal profit (other than as a normal member of a public company).
  • Real-World Example: A member of an SPSC is also a partner in a firm that wins a contract to supply paper to the state government. This is a “misbehaviour,” and the President can start the removal process under Clause (1).

Article 318: Power to make regulations as to conditions of service of members and staff of the Commission.

• Plain English: The President (for UPSC) or the Governor (for SPSC) has the power to make “regulations” (rules) that define:
  • (a) The number of members on the commission and their “conditions of service” (salary, pension, etc.).
  • (b) The number of staff (clerks, secretaries) for the commission and their service conditions.
• Proviso:
  • Plain English: This is another “independence” clause. The “conditions of service” for a member (like their salary) cannot be “varied to his disadvantage” after they have been appointed.
  • Real-World Example: A state government, angry at the SPSC, cannot pass a rule to cut the salaries of the current members. They can only set a lower salary for new members who are appointed later.

Article 319: Prohibition as to the holding of offices by members of Commission on ceasing to be such members.

This is a very strict “post-retirement” restriction to prevent members from favoring the government in the hopes of getting another job.

• (a) UPSC Chairman:
  • Plain English: After retiring, the UPSC Chairman is ineligible for any further employment under the Government of India or any State Government. The career stops here.
• (b) SPSC Chairman:
  • Plain English: A retired SPSC Chairman can only be appointed as:
    1. The Chairman of the UPSC.
    2. A Member of the UPSC.
    3. The Chairman of any other SPSC.
  • They cannot take any other job in the government (e.g., they cannot become a Governor or an ambassador).
• (c) UPSC Member (not Chairman):
  • Plain English: A retired UPSC Member can only be appointed as:
    1. The Chairman of the UPSC.
    2. The Chairman of any SPSC.
  • They cannot take any other government job.
• (d) SPSC Member (not Chairman):
  • Plain English: A retired SPSC Member has the most options. They can be appointed as:
    1. The Chairman or a Member of the UPSC.
    2. The Chairman of that same SPSC or any other SPSC.
  • They cannot take any other government job.

Article 320: Functions of Public Service Commissions.

• Clause (1):
  • Plain English: The main job of the UPSC and SPSC is to conduct examinations for appointments to the services of the Union and the State, respectively.
• Clause (2):
  • Plain English: The UPSC, if requested by states, can also assist them in creating “joint recruitment” schemes for services that need special qualifications.
• Clause (3):
  • Plain English: This is the “consultation” clause. The Union or State Government must consult its respective PSC on the following matters:
    1. (a) On all matters relating to methods of recruitment.
    2. (b) On the principles to be followed in making appointments, promotions, and transfers, and on the “suitability” of candidates.
    3. (c) On all disciplinary matters affecting a civil servant (e.g., a “petition” from an officer who has been punished).
    4. (d) On any claim from an officer that the government should pay their legal bills (if they were sued for an act done as part of their duty).
    5. (e) On any claim for a pension for an injury sustained while on duty.
• Proviso to Clause (3):
  • Plain English: This is the major exception. The President (for Union) or Governor (for State) can make “regulations” that specify matters where the PSC does not need to be consulted.
  • Real-World Example: A state Governor, on the advice of the Cabinet, can issue a “Limitation of Functions” Regulation, stating that the government does not need to consult the SPSC for:
    1. Any temporary appointments lasting less than one year.
    2. Promotions within certain lower-level groups.
    3. Certain judicial or specialist posts.
• Clause (4):
  • Plain English: This clarifies that the government does not need to consult the PSC on how it will implement reservation policies for backward classes (under Art. 16(4)) or for Scheduled Castes/Tribes (under Art. 335).
• Clause (5):
  • Plain English: Any “regulations” made by the President or Governor under the Proviso to Clause (3) (which take away the PSC’s functions) must be laid before Parliament or the State Legislature. The legislature has the power to modify or repeal them.

Article 321: Power to extend functions of Public Service Commissions.

• Plain English: This article allows Parliament (for the UPSC) or the State Legislature (for the SPSC) to pass a law giving additional jobs to their respective Public Service Commissions.
• Key Detail: This can include asking the PSC to handle recruitment for other bodies, like a local authority (municipality), a government-owned corporation (like a “Maharatna” company), or any other public institution.
• Real-World Example: A State Legislature passes an “Act” that says, “From now on, the recruitment for all ‘Grade A’ officers in our state’s Electricity Board (a public corporation) shall also be conducted by the State Public Service Commission (SPSC).” This article gives them the power to make that law.

Article 322: Expenses of Public Service Commissions.

• Plain English: This ensures the financial independence of the PSCs. It says that all expenses of a PSC (including the salaries and pensions for its members and staff) are “charged upon” the main government bank account.
  • For the UPSC, expenses are charged to the Consolidated Fund of India.
  • For a SPSC, expenses are charged to the Consolidated Fund of the State.
• Key Detail: “Charged upon” means this spending is not put to an annual vote in Parliament or the Assembly. The government must pay it. This prevents the government from punishing an independent PSC by cutting its budget.
• Real-World Example: A state government is angry with its SPSC for not recommending its preferred candidates. During the budget, the government cannot threaten to stop the salaries of the SPSC members. Those salaries are “charged” and must be paid, just like a High Court judge’s salary.

Article 323: Reports of Public Service Commissions.

• Clause (1):
  • Plain English: This is the “accountability” clause for the UPSC. The UPSC must present an annual report to the President detailing all the work it did that year.
  • Key Detail: The President must then lay this report before both Houses of Parliament. If there were any cases where the government rejected the UPSC’s advice, the government must also attach a “memorandum” (a note) explaining the reasons why it did not follow the UPSC’s recommendation.
• Clause (2):
  • Plain English: This is the exact same rule for the states. The SPSC must give its annual report to the Governor. The Governor must lay that report before the State Legislature, along with a memorandum explaining any cases where the state government rejected the SPSC’s advice.
• Real-World Example (for both): The UPSC recommends Candidate A for a post. The government, however, appoints Candidate B. In its annual report, the UPSC will mention this. In the “memorandum” to Parliament, the government must explain, “The advice of the UPSC was not accepted in this case because Candidate B had an exceptional, rare qualification that the selection rules did not account for…”

PART XIVA: TRIBUNALS

(This entire part was added by the 42nd Amendment Act, 1976)

Article 323A: Administrative tribunals.

• Clause (1):
  • Plain English: This gives Parliament the power to pass a law to set up special courts called “Administrative Tribunals.”
  • Purpose: These tribunals only deal with disputes and complaints from government employees about their “recruitment and conditions of service.” This covers Union, State, local body (municipal), and corporation employees.
• Clause (2):
  • Plain English: The law that Parliament passes can:
    • (a) Create one “Central Administrative Tribunal” (CAT) for the Union and one “State Administrative Tribunal” (SAT) for each state.
    • (b) Define their powers (including the power to punish for contempt).
    • (c) Set their procedures (like time limits for filing cases).
    • (d) Exclude the jurisdiction of all other courts (e.g., High Courts) over these matters. (But see note below)
    • (e) Transfer all pending service cases from other courts to the new tribunal.
• Clause (3):
  • Plain English: This article overrides any other part of the Constitution.
• Real-World Example: Parliament passed the “Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985.” This Act created CAT (Central Administrative Tribunal). If a central government employee (like an Income Tax officer) is unfairly dismissed, they cannot go to the High Court. They must file their case only with the CAT.
• Important Note (Chandrakumar Case): The Supreme Court later ruled (in the L. Chandra Kumar case) that Clause (2)(d) is unconstitutional to the extent that it removes the High Court’s power of judicial review (under Article 226). Therefore, today, an appeal can be filed in the High Court against a Tribunal’s decision.

Article 323B: Tribunals for other matters.

• Clause (1):
  • Plain English: This gives the “appropriate Legislature” (Parliament or a State Legislature) the power to create tribunals for a different list of specific subjects, as long as it’s a subject they have the power to make laws on.
• Clause (2):
  • Plain English: This is the list of subjects for which these other tribunals can be created. It includes:
    • (a) Tax (levy, assessment, collection).
    • (b) Foreign exchange, customs (import/export).
    • (c) Industrial and labour disputes.
    • (d) Land reforms.
    • (e) Ceiling on urban property.
    • (f) Elections to Parliament and State Legislatures (but not the issues covered by Art. 329, like election petitions).
    • (g) Production and distribution of food and other “essential goods.”
    • (h) Rent control and tenancy issues.
• Clause (3) & (4):
  • Plain English: These are the same as in the previous article. They give the legislature power to set the tribunal’s procedures, powers, and to exclude the jurisdiction of other courts (subject to the same Supreme Court ruling).
• Real-World Example: Parliament creates the “National Green Tribunal (NGT)” to handle environmental cases. A State Legislature passes an act to create a “State Rent Control Tribunal” to handle all disputes between landlords and tenants, taking them out of the regular civil courts.