Doctrine of Ple
Doctrine of Ple
# 310
civil servants hold office at the pleasure of president /Governor...as the case maybe ( accepts the
common law doctrine of pleasure)
#common law?
Royal servants in England Deemed to hold office during the will and pleasure of crown
# William IV
during reign he passed a statute giving full liberty to remove dismiss Such officers at pleasure
1. no member of civil service under Union or state shall be removed by authority subordinate to that by
which he was appointed
informed of charges
there is master servant relationship so protection given in dismissal removal reduction of rank is by way
of punishment
# Shyamlal v.up
compulsory retirement as per service rules will not come under it because it is not a punishment
# CJ Joseph v.Kerala
dismissal from service struck down compulsory retirement on refusal to report for duty..in the absence
of petitioner
# exception to 311(2 )
NO ENQUIRY REQUIRED
(a)dismissed/ removed /reduced rank by conduct lead to conviction on criminal charges
(b)authority when doing so, for some reason recorded it is not practicable to hold enquiry.
(c) president/ Governor satisfied in the interest of security of state not expedient to hold enquiry
# A 311(2)(b)
dismissal enquiry expressly prohibited in the above situation if Malafide then only Court interfere
#one case
respondent convicted under section 322 IPC caused head injury with the iron rod to Superior officer
# another case
security risk
objective test
found no right to post..and nothing was against future promotion...no protection given
transfer
Pearachi was Sheristadar in district court had additional charge as PA to district judge