Doctrine of pleasure

Also called: Article 310 · Topic: Civil Services: Role, Accountability and Reforms · NCERT: Beyond NCERT

Meaning

The doctrine of pleasure (Article 310) means a government servant holds office only as long as the President (for the Union) or the Governor (for a state) wishes. In principle the job can be ended at any time. In India this power is not absolute. It is limited by the Constitution's own exceptions, by the Article 311 safeguards, by Articles 14 and 16, and by service laws and rules made under Article 309.

It matters because this one rule decides how far a civil servant can be removed at will. The question behind it is how to keep officers accountable and still protect honest officers from political revenge.

Explanation

What it means and where it came from

• "Pleasure" means the ruler's wish. The servant stays in the job only while the ruler is "pleased".
• Union civil servants hold office during the pleasure of the President.

• State civil servants hold office during the pleasure of the Governor.

• Origin: English law.

• The Crown could dismiss its servants at will.

• A servant could not sue the Crown for wrongful dismissal.

• First use in India: Section 96B of the Government of India Act, 1919. Even then the pleasure was "subject to rules", and courts checked whether a penalty followed those rules [2].

Four limits on the pleasure in India

1. "Except as expressly provided by this Constitution" - Some posts do not depend on pleasure. They have fixed protection: Supreme Court and High Court judges, the CAG, the Chief Election Commissioner and UPSC members. - These officers can be removed only by a special procedure, such as removal through Parliament.

2. Article 311: procedural safeguards - Art. 311(1): a civil servant cannot be dismissed or removed by an authority subordinate to (below) the one that appointed them [1]. - Art. 311(2): there can be no dismissal, removal or reduction in rank without an inquiry. The person must be told the charges and given a reasonable opportunity of being heard [1].

3. Articles 14 and 16 - These give equality before law and equal opportunity in public jobs. - If the pleasure is used in an arbitrary or discriminatory way, the order can be struck down.

4. Service laws and rules under Article 309 - Parliament or a state legislature can make laws on recruitment and conditions of service. Until such a law exists, the President or Governor can make rules [2].

Contract appointees: Art. 310(2)

• A person with special skills may be hired on contract.
• If the post ends early for reasons other than misconduct, the contract can provide for compensation.

Who actually uses the pleasure

• The President or Governor does not act personally. They act only on the advice of the Council of Ministers (Shamsher Singh v. State of Punjab, 1974, 7-judge bench).
• No personal satisfaction is needed. The President or Governor does not have to be personally satisfied that a disciplinary penalty is justified (Union v. Sripati Ranjan, 1975) [2].
• So in practice, the "pleasure" is the government's power, used through the official machinery.

In the Constitution and practice

• Where it sits: Part XIV, Chapter I ("Services").
• Art. 309: laws and rules on service conditions.
• Art. 310: doctrine of pleasure.
• Art. 311: safeguards.

• The 2nd ARC calls these three articles "a continuum". Each one works only together with the other two [2].

• Constituent Assembly: the protections were debated on 8 September 1949. The debate covered the grounds for dismissal without inquiry and whether only Public Service Commissions should handle removals [1].

• Sardar Patel's aim was that senior officers could give honest, frank advice to ministers without fear of punishment [2].

• Who is outside the safeguards:

• Defence personnel serve wholly at pleasure under Art. 310. Art. 311 does not protect them.

• PSU employees are also not covered, because they do not hold civil posts.

• Key cases:

• Parshotam Lal Dhingra v. Union of India (1958): Art. 311 protects only against punishment. An ending of service counts as punishment if either test is met:
  • Right to the post test: the person had a right to hold the post, and that right was cut short.
  • Evil consequences test: the order brought a penal "evil consequence", such as a stigma or loss of pension [2].
• Shamsher Singh (1974): the pleasure is used on the advice of ministers.
• Baikuntha Nath Das (1992): compulsory retirement in the public interest is not punishment, so the pleasure can work here without an Art. 311 inquiry [2].

• Union of India v. Tulsiram Patel (1985):

  • The second proviso to Art. 311(2) allows dismissal without inquiry in three cases. The Court upheld all three.
  • In those cases the employee cannot use Art. 14 to demand a hearing.
  • Courts can still check such orders for mala fides (bad faith) [2].

• 42nd Amendment (1976): it removed the second hearing on the proposed penalty, with effect from 3 January 1977 [1][2]. This widened the government's room to act.

• Recent practice: since 2021, the J&K administration has dismissed several employees under Art. 311(2)(c), on the ground of security of the State, for alleged terror links (verify current).
• Status: Arts. 310 and 311 have not been repealed.

Don't confuse with

• Article 311 safeguards: Art. 310 gives the power to end service at pleasure. Art. 311 limits that power through the appointing-authority rule and the inquiry rule.
• Tenure protection (judges, CAG, CEC, UPSC members): these posts sit outside the pleasure. They are removable only by a special procedure, not at the President's wish.
• Crown's pleasure in English law: in the UK the Crown could dismiss at will and the servant could not sue. In India the pleasure is limited by the Constitution, so courts can strike down arbitrary orders.
• Article 309: it deals with recruitment and service conditions through laws and rules. It does not deal with ending service at pleasure. But rules made under it limit how the pleasure is used.

Prelims Hooks

• Art. 309 = laws/rules on service conditions; Art. 310 = doctrine of pleasure; Art. 311 = safeguards; Art. 323A = administrative tribunals (CAT).
• The doctrine of pleasure was first applied in India by Section 96B, Government of India Act, 1919 [2].
• Art. 310(2): a contract appointee whose post ends early for reasons other than misconduct can get compensation.
• Shamsher Singh (1974): the pleasure is used on the advice of ministers. Sripati Ranjan (1975): the President's personal satisfaction is not needed [2].
• Trap: defence personnel serve wholly at pleasure, and Art. 311 does not protect them. All India Service officers are covered by Art. 311.
• The 2nd ARC, 4th Report (2007) recommended repealing both Art. 310 and Art. 311 and passing one law under Art. 309 [2].

Mains Points

• Accountability vs neutrality: without limits, the pleasure would expose honest officers to political vendetta (revenge) and arbitrary dismissal. That is why Patel wanted protection for frank advice [2]. But the NCRWC (2002) found that the safeguards "have in practice acted to shield the guilty" [2].
• The 2nd ARC's reform plan (2007, para 3.10.24) [2]:
• Repeal Arts. 310 and 311.
• Pass a full law under Art. 309, applied to the states as well. It would protect bona fide actions (actions taken honestly in the public interest) and guard against arbitrary action.

• The ARC's reasons: no other constitution, not even the UK's, seems to give such guarantees, and government is no longer the only big employer.

• Middle path instead of repeal:

• Natural justice and the rule of law are part of the basic structure (core features Parliament cannot destroy). So a hearing would be needed even if Art. 311 went [2].
• A better fix is time-bound inquiries.
• Another is post-decisional hearings (a hearing after removal) for clear corruption cases, as the Hota Committee (2004) proposed [2].
• This would also include wider use of compulsory retirement for staff who do not perform.

Related concepts

• Safeguards for civil servants
• Dismissal without inquiry
• Tulsiram Patel case

Read more

• The doctrine of pleasure and the Article 311 safeguards