Give civil servants fixed tenure, constitute Civil Service Board directs Supreme Court; KK Venugopal, Paras Kuhad appear in landmark case

In another landmark judgment, the Supreme Court today held that the civil servants must get a fixed minimum tenure in their posting. The Court also directed the Central and State governments (Respondents) to constitute a Civil Service Board (CSB) to guide and advise the postings, transfer and promotions of civil servants across the country. However, the Apex Court rejected the demand that the CSB should be a fully independent body free from executive control..The judgment was delivered by Justices KS Radhakrishnan and Pinaki Chandra Ghose in a Public Interest Litigation [TSR Subramanian & Ors. v. Union of India & Ors. WP(C) No. 82/2011] filed by 83 former bureaucrats, government and CBI officials (Petitioners)..Senior Adovcate KK Venugopal, represented the Petitioners while Additional Solicitor General Paras Kuhad appeared for the Union government..The Petitioners had prayed for the creation of an independent Civil Service Board both at the Centre and the State level based on the recommendations made by the Hota Committee of 2004. The Petitioners had also sought a fixed tenure for civil servants based on the recommendations of the Jha Commission of 1986, and a direction that every civil servant must formally record all instructions received from administrative superiors, legislators, and other persons having commercial and business interests..The Central government had submitted that.“any mechanism within the governmental structure could be thought of, but involvement of any person, howsoever high he may be, who is not part of the Centre or the State Government, would not be advisable, especially in the absence of any such provision in the Constitution or the laws made by Centre and the State Governments.”.Highlighting the Constitutional provisions governing the roles and responsibilities of political executive and civil servants the Court proceeded to hold that,.“Civil servants have to be accountable, of course to their political executive but they have to function under the Constitution, consequently they are also accountable to the people of this country….. In the present political scenario, the role of civil servants has become very complex and onerous. Often they have to take decisions which will have far reaching consequences in the economic and technological fields. Their decisions must be transparent and must be in public interest. They should be fully accountable to the community they serve.”.Despite the said observations, the Court went on to hold that it found it.“Difficult to give a positive direction to constitute an independent CSB at the Centre and State Level, without executive control, which Hota Committee has recommended to be statutory in nature, that too, comprising of persons from outside the Government.”.It, therefore, directed the Centre, State Governments and the Union Territories to constitute,.“[A] CSB, consisting of high ranking in service officers, who are experts in their respective fields, with the Cabinet Secretary at the Centre and Chief Secretary at the State level, could be a better alternative (till the Parliament enacts a law), to guide and advise the State Government on all service matters, especially on transfers, postings and disciplinary action, etc., though their views also could be overruled, by the political executive, but by recording reasons…”.Holding that a fixed tenure for the bureaucrats will promote professionalism, efficiency and good governance, the Court made it clear that the civil servants must get a fixed minimum tenure in a posting and directed the Centre and States to pass orders within 3 months to give effect to the same..Observing that deterioration in the functioning of bureaucracy was due to political interference, the Court also said that the civil servants must not act on mere verbal instructions of the executive but should ensure that written instructions are obtained. The Court held that acting on oral directions, and not recording the same could defeat the rights guaranteed to the citizens under the Right to Information Act. It, therefore, directed all the State Governments and Union Territories to issue directions like Rule 3(3) of the All India Services (Conduct) Rules, 1968, – which requires all orders from superior officers to be in writing – in their respective States and Union Territories.This judgment of the Supreme Court comes close on the heels of attempts by various governments to subvert the functioning of IAS officials such as Durga Shakti Nagpal and Ashok Khemka. .Full text of the judgment is given below.