Article 317

Article 317 of the Constitution of India lays down the detailed procedure for the removal and suspension of the Chairman or members of the Public Service Commissions (PSCs) — whether at the Union, State, or Joint Commission level. It is one of the strongest safeguards ensuring the independence, impartiality, and integrity of these constitutional institutions, preventing arbitrary interference by the executive.
This Article mirrors similar protections granted to other constitutional offices such as Judges of the Supreme Court and High Courts, the Comptroller and Auditor-General of India, and the Chief Election Commissioner, thereby emphasising the constitutional principle of institutional independence.

Constitutional Objective

The Public Service Commissions are key constitutional authorities responsible for maintaining merit, fairness, and transparency in public service recruitment. For such institutions to function effectively and fearlessly, their members must enjoy security of tenure and protection against politically motivated removal.
Article 317 therefore establishes a rigorous and quasi-judicial process for removal, ensuring that it can occur only through objective scrutiny and on legally valid grounds.

Text and Structure of Article 317

Article 317 reads as follows:
(1) Subject to the provisions of clause (3), the Chairman or any other member of a Public Service Commission shall only be removed from his office by order of the President on the ground of misbehaviour after the Supreme Court, on reference being made to it by the President, has, on inquiry held in accordance with the procedure prescribed in that behalf under Article 145, reported that the Chairman or such other member, as the case may be, ought to be removed on such ground.
(2) The President, in the case of the Union Commission or a Joint Commission, and the Governor in the case of a State Commission, may suspend the Chairman or any other member of the Commission in respect of whom a reference has been made to the Supreme Court under clause (1) until the President has passed orders on receipt of the report of the Supreme Court on such reference.
(3) Notwithstanding the foregoing provisions of this Article, the President may by order remove from office the Chairman or any other member of a Public Service Commission if the Chairman or such other member, as the case may be,—(a) is adjudged an insolvent; or(b) engages during his term of office in any paid employment outside the duties of his office; or(c) is, in the opinion of the President, unfit to continue in office by reason of infirmity of mind or body.
(4) If the Chairman or any other member of a Public Service Commission is or becomes in any way concerned or interested in any contract or agreement made by or on behalf of the Government of India or of the Government of a State or participates in any way in the profit thereof or in any benefit or emolument arising therefrom otherwise than as a member and in common with the other members of an incorporated company, he shall, for the purposes of clause (1), be deemed to be guilty of misbehaviour.

Breakdown of Provisions

1. Removal on Grounds of Misbehaviour — Article 317(1)

• Authority: Only the President of India has the power to remove the Chairman or members of the Union or Joint Public Service Commission.
• Ground: The removal must be based on “misbehaviour”.
• Process:
  1. The President makes a reference to the Supreme Court of India.
  2. The Supreme Court conducts an inquiry in accordance with procedures prescribed under Article 145.
  3. After the inquiry, the Court submits its report to the President, stating whether the person should be removed.
  4. The President acts in accordance with the Supreme Court’s recommendation.

This stringent procedure ensures judicial oversight over executive action and protects the Commission’s members from arbitrary dismissal.

2. Suspension Pending Inquiry — Article 317(2)

• During the pendency of the Supreme Court inquiry, the President (for the Union or Joint Commission) or the Governor (for a State Commission) may suspend the concerned Chairman or member.
• Such suspension is temporary and continues until the President issues final orders after receiving the Supreme Court’s report.

This provision ensures the integrity of the ongoing inquiry while preventing the person under investigation from influencing Commission proceedings.

3. Removal on Other Grounds — Article 317(3)

In addition to misbehaviour, the President may directly remove a Chairman or member of a Public Service Commission on the following objective grounds, without a Supreme Court inquiry:

1. Insolvency: If the person is declared financially insolvent by a competent court.
2. Paid Employment: If the member engages in any paid employment outside the duties of office during tenure.
3. Infirmity of Mind or Body: If the President finds the member mentally or physically unfit to continue in office.

These grounds ensure that members maintain personal integrity and professional fitness throughout their tenure.

4. Definition of Misbehaviour — Article 317(4)

While “misbehaviour” is not expressly defined in the Constitution, Article 317(4) deems a member guilty of misbehaviour if they:

• Are involved or interested in any government contract or agreement; or
• Derive any benefit or profit from such contracts, except as an ordinary shareholder of a company.

This provision prevents conflicts of interest and reinforces the ethical standards required of PSC members.

Grounds for Removal under Article 317

Safeguards for Independence

The removal process under Article 317 provides several constitutional safeguards:

• Judicial involvement: The Supreme Court’s inquiry ensures fairness and impartiality.
• Fixed tenure protection: Members cannot be removed except through the prescribed process.
• Separation of powers: The executive’s role is limited to initiation and implementation; the judiciary determines justification.
• Suspension only after reference: Suspension cannot be imposed without a formal reference to the Supreme Court.

These safeguards are designed to maintain the autonomy and credibility of the Public Service Commissions.

Judicial Interpretations and Landmark Cases

• R. S. Dass v. Union of India (1986): The Supreme Court clarified that the term “misbehaviour” under Article 317 must involve conduct that renders the member unfit for office, including actions that compromise the integrity or impartiality of the Commission.
• Union of India v. Tulsiram Patel (1985): The Court highlighted that the principles of natural justice are inherent in any removal proceeding under Article 317, ensuring fairness and due process.
• A. P. Public Service Commission v. B. Sarat Chandra (1990): The Court discussed the powers of the President and the procedural role of the Supreme Court in the inquiry process, affirming the binding nature of the Court’s report.
• State of Punjab v. Salil Sabhlok (2013): The Court emphasised the ethical and moral integrity required of PSC members, underscoring that these commissions must remain beyond reproach to preserve public confidence.

Comparison with Other Constitutional Authorities

The protection afforded to members of the Public Service Commissions under Article 317 is similar to that provided for other high constitutional offices:

This parity underscores the framers’ intention to ensure independence and impartiality across constitutional institutions.

Significance of Article 317

• Ensures Independence: Protects PSC members from executive pressure or political retribution.
• Promotes Accountability: Establishes clear grounds for removal and ethical standards.
• Maintains Institutional Integrity: Upholds public trust in recruitment processes.
• Balances Power: Integrates judicial oversight in executive actions.

By combining stringent removal criteria with judicial inquiry, Article 317 reinforces the constitutional ethos of fair administration and integrity in public services.

Related Constitutional Articles

• Article 315: Establishes Public Service Commissions.
• Article 316: Governs appointment and tenure of Commission members.
• Article 318: Authorises the President or Governor to make regulations on service conditions.
• Article 319: Restricts members from future government employment.

Together, these provisions form a comprehensive constitutional framework that guarantees the independence, efficiency, and accountability of Public Service Commissions.