Article 311 provides essential safeguards for civil servants in India. It ensures that no civil servant can be dismissed or removed by an authority subordinate to the one that appointed them. It also mandates that any such action must follow a proper inquiry process where the civil servant is informed of the charges and given a fair opportunity to defend themselves.
However, there are exceptions where these safeguards do not apply, such as in cases of criminal conviction or when it is impractical to hold an inquiry for specific reasons. The article aims to protect civil servants from arbitrary actions and provides legal enforceability for these provisions.
Article 311 comes into play when actions like dismissal, removal, or reduction in rank are considered punishments. The challenge lies in determining whether a termination of service or reduction in rank constitutes punishment, as seen in the case of Parshottam Lai Dhingra Vs Union of India . The Supreme Court established two key tests to ascertain when a termination is punitive:
If a government servant had the right to hold a position based on the terms of a service contract or service rules, then termination or reduction in rank is viewed as punishment, granting protection under Article 311. Articles 310 and 311 are applicable to government servants, regardless of whether they are permanent, temporary, officiating, or on probation.
Article 311(2) outlines the procedure for dismissing or removing a government servant. However, there are specific exceptions where this procedure may not be followed. These exceptions include situations such as conviction on a criminal charge, impracticability of following the procedure, and reasons of security.
Conclusion:
With recent cases like that of Pradeep Sharma, the encounter specialist of Mumbai police who has links with underworld and other charges of corruption was dismissed from his post which proves that civil servants cant make mockery of law if they are guilty then they will be punished and no matter what position they held. So, the main reason for which article 310 and 311 has been envisaged in the constitution by the makers of constitution is still working today but it is interesting to note that the framer of the constitution had a insight of corruption in near future that's why such provisions were included.
48 docs|2 tests
|
1. What is the significance of Article 310 of the Indian Constitution? |
2. How does Article 311 differ from Article 310? |
3. Which services are excluded from the purview of Article 310? |
4. What are the exceptions to Article 311(2)? |
5. Is suspension or compulsory retirement considered a punishment under Article 311? |
|
Explore Courses for CLAT PG exam
|