Service Matters

Protection to Government Servant

There is a protection to Government Servant against any adverse Order giving effect of termination of service. Under statutory provision of Rules/ Regulations and Constitution of India, their services are protected.

Appointing or Higher Authority Can Dismiss a Government Servant

Under Article 311 of the Constitution of India, a civil servant cannot be dismissed, removed, or reduced in rank by an authority that is subordinate to the authority by which he was appointed.

 What this means:

(a) If a government employee was appointed by a certain authority (say, a Director), then only that Director or someone higher (like a Secretary or Minister) can pass an order for dismissal, removal, or demotion.

(b) A junior officer or someone lower in the administrative hierarchy cannot pass such an order.

Case Reference: Union of India vs. Major S.P. Sharma, (2014) 6 SCC 351 wherein the Supreme Court reaffirmed this constitutional protection, highlighting that disciplinary actions like dismissal must come only from the competent (equal or higher) appointing authority.

Government Must Hold Inquiry before Dismissing a Public Servant

Article 311(2) lays down procedural safeguards to protect government servants from arbitrary dismissal. According to this provision, an officer can be dismissed, removed, or demoted only after following due process, which includes:

Key Procedural Steps:

(a) Charge-sheet: The government must inform the employee of the allegations/charges against him.

(b) Inquiry: A formal departmental inquiry must be conducted by a competent officer.

(c) Opportunity to Defend: The accused employee must be given a reasonable chance to present his defense, including producing evidence and examining witnesses.

These steps ensure natural justice and fair hearing, which are essential in administrative law.

Case Reference: Union of India vs. Major S.P. Sharma, (2014) 6 SCC 351,  The Court emphasized that a government servant’s right to defend himself is integral and cannot be bypassed without violating Article 311(2).

Government Can Dismiss Without Inquiry in Interest of State Security

Although inquiry is normally mandatory, Article 311(2) – second proviso, clause (c) provides an exception:

Exception Clause:

If the President (for central services) or Governor (for state services) is satisfied that holding an inquiry is not in the interest of the security of the State, then the government may dismiss or remove the employee without any inquiry.

Scope and Usage:

(a) This is an extraordinary power and must be used sparingly and only in sensitive cases (like espionage, national security breaches, etc.).

(b) The satisfaction of the President or Governor must be genuine, based on material facts, and subject to judicial review in limited circumstances.

Case Reference: Union of India vs. Major S.P. Sharma, (2014) 6 SCC 351, The Supreme Court upheld that in cases involving national security, the inquiry may be dispensed with to protect larger public interest.

Government Servant Cannot Be Prosecuted Without Sanction for Official Acts

Under Section 197 of the Criminal Procedure Code (CrPC), a public servant cannot be prosecuted in a court of law for any act done in the discharge of official duties unless prior sanction is obtained from the competent government authority.

Why This Protection Exists:

(a) To shield honest officers from frivolous or malicious prosecution.

(b) To ensure smooth functioning of administration by protecting lawful actions taken in good faith.

However, this protection does not apply if:

(a) The act is not connected with official duty.

(b0 The act was done in bad faith or for personal gain.

Case Reference: Jaya Singh vs. K.K. Velayutham, 2006 (55) ACC 805 (SC) wherein the Supreme Court ruled that prosecution of a government officer for acts within the scope of official duty must be preceded by appropriate government sanction.