https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=311830 Rule 7(i) of the All India Services (Conduct) Rules, 1968, was upheld as a reasonable service restriction on public criticism of current or recent Government policy or action, with a direct nexus to discipline, efficiency, and public confidence in administration. The challenge under Articles 19(1)(a), 19(2), and 13(2) therefore failed. Disciplinary jurisdiction under Rule 3(1) of the All India Service (Discipline and Appeal) Rules, 1969, was confined to conduct reasonably connected with official duties; purely private conduct with no such nexus fell outside that power, so action based on the unrelated examination malpractice allegation was without authority and was quashed. Alleged legal mala fides based on speech-related misconduct were not substantiated. en-us Tue, 09 Oct 1984 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 16 Jan 2024 17:21:46 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=311830 Rule 7(i) of the All India Services (Conduct) Rules, 1968, was upheld as a reasonable service restriction on public criticism of current or recent Government policy or action, with a direct nexus to discipline, efficiency, and public confidence in administration. The challenge under Articles 19(1)(a), 19(2), and 13(2) therefore failed. Disciplinary jurisdiction under Rule 3(1) of the All India Service (Discipline and Appeal) Rules, 1969, was confined to conduct reasonably connected with official duties; purely private conduct with no such nexus fell outside that power, so action based on the unrelated examination malpractice allegation was without authority and was quashed. Alleged legal mala fides based on speech-related misconduct were not substantiated. Case-Laws Indian Laws Tue, 09 Oct 1984 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=311830