Government servants dismissed without inquiry under Article 311(2) second proviso for rioting and attacking police station

SC upheld dismissal of government servants without inquiry under Article 311(2) second proviso. Police personnel from two forces rioted at Gwalior Mela in 1981, attacking police station and forcing wireless closure after colleague's arrest. Governor's subjective satisfaction regarding state security was deemed non-justiciable. Court found holding individual inquiries would be inexpedient given security concerns and violent demonstrations. Petitions dismissed as second proviso was properly applied in circumstances threatening public order.

---

---

Issues Involved:

1. Interpretation of Articles 309, 310, and 311 of the Constitution of India.
2. Application of the second proviso to Article 311(2).
3. Validity of dismissals and removals without inquiry under the second proviso to Article 311(2).
4. Impact of the pleasure doctrine on the tenure of civil servants.
5. Relationship between Article 14 and Article 311.
6. Validity of service rules vis-à-vis the second proviso to Article 311(2).
7. Judicial review of decisions made under the second proviso to Article 311(2).

Summary:

1. Interpretation of Articles 309, 310, and 311 of the Constitution of India:
The judgment addresses the interpretation of Articles 309, 310, and 311, particularly focusing on the second proviso to Article 311(2) after its amendment by the Constitution (Forty-second Amendment) Act, 1976. Article 311 provides safeguards for civil servants, including protection against dismissal, removal, or reduction in rank without an inquiry, except in specific cases outlined in the second proviso.

2. Application of the second proviso to Article 311(2):
The second proviso to Article 311(2) allows for the dismissal, removal, or reduction in rank of a civil servant without an inquiry in three cases: (a) conviction on a criminal charge, (b) impracticability of holding an inquiry, and (c) expediency in the interest of the security of the State. The judgment emphasizes that these exceptions must be narrowly construed and applied strictly.

3. Validity of dismissals and removals without inquiry under the second proviso to Article 311(2):
The Court held that dismissals and removals without inquiry under the second proviso to Article 311(2) are valid if the conditions specified in the proviso are met. The disciplinary authority must record reasons in writing for dispensing with the inquiry, and these reasons must be relevant and sufficient to justify the action.

4. Impact of the pleasure doctrine on the tenure of civil servants:
The pleasure doctrine, as embodied in Article 310(1), means that civil servants hold office at the pleasure of the President or the Governor. However, this doctrine is subject to the express provisions of the Constitution, including Article 311, which provides safeguards against arbitrary dismissal, removal, or reduction in rank.

5. Relationship between Article 14 and Article 311:
The judgment clarifies that Article 14, which guarantees equality before the law, does not override the specific provisions of Article 311. The principles of natural justice, including the audi alteram partem rule, are inherent in Article 14 but are expressly excluded by the second proviso to Article 311(2) in the specified cases.

6. Validity of service rules vis-à-vis the second proviso to Article 311(2):
Service rules made under Article 309 must conform to the provisions of the Constitution, including Article 311. Rules that provide for dismissal, removal, or reduction in rank without inquiry must align with the exceptions in the second proviso to Article 311(2). Any rule that restricts the exclusionary effect of the second proviso would be unconstitutional.

7. Judicial review of decisions made under the second proviso to Article 311(2):
The Court retains the power of judicial review to ensure that the conditions for applying the second proviso to Article 311(2) are met. The decision of the disciplinary authority to dispense with the inquiry is subject to review to check for relevance, sufficiency, and absence of mala fides. The Court will not interfere if two views are possible and the decision is reasonable.

Final Orders:
1. Civil Appeal No. 6814 of 1983 is allowed, reversing the High Court's decision.
2. Writ Petitions Nos. 1953, 7393, 1392, and 2022 of 1981 are dismissed.
3. Other writ petitions and transferred cases are dismissed, while Civil Appeals Nos. 3484 and 3512 of 1982 are allowed.
4. All interim orders are vacated, and no costs are awarded.
5. Pending matters involving the interpretation of the second proviso to Article 311(2) are disposed of in accordance with this judgment.

---