'Political Neutrality Must For Civil Servants', Says Supreme Court While Refusing To Impose 'Cooling Off' Period To Join Politics After Retirement

The Supreme Court recently dismissed a writ petition to impose restrictions to prevent Civil Servants from contesting elections immediately after retirement or resignation from service, by imposing a "Cooling off Period".Whether there should be any "Cooling off Period" for civil servants for them to contest elections or not is best left to the concerned Legislature, the bench comprising Justices Indira Banerjee and A S Bopanna.The writ petition was filed by Vivek Krishna who had appeared in person before the Court. He contended that there are allegations of bureaucrats deviating from strict norms of political neutrality with a view to obtaining party tickets to contest elections. The court noted that there is no complaint of violation of any fundamental right of the Petitioner or any group of persons represented by the Petitioner."Nobody has the fundamental right to get a mandatory order of this Court directing the appropriate Legislature to enact law or the Executive to frame rules imposing restrictions on the eligibility of civil servant to contest elections..."It is not for this Court to decide whether or not there should be any rules/guidelines for a bureaucrat to contest elections. It is for the appropriate authorities to take a decision in this matter.", the court said while dismissing the writ petition.'Unsupported ' Allegations of bureaucrats deviating from strict norms of political neutrality with a view to obtaining party tickets to contest electionsRegarding the allegations of bureaucrats deviating from strict norms of political neutrality, the court observed : The allegations of bureaucrats deviating from strict norms of political neutrality with a view to obtaining party tickets to contest elections, is vague, devoid of particulars and unsupported by any materials which could justify intervention of this Court. No particulars have been given of the number and/or percentage of erstwhile bureaucrats, who have contested elections on the ticket of a political party, not to speak of any act on their part, prior to their retirement, in deviation of the standards required of bureaucratsIntegrity, impartiality, neutrality, transparency and honesty are non-negotiable. The court however observed that the integrity, impartiality, neutrality, transparency and honesty of civil servants are non-negotiable.There can be no doubt that civil servants should maintain the highest ethical standards of integrity and honesty; political neutrality; fairness and impartiality in the discharge of duties, courtesy, accountability and transparency. Integrity, impartiality, neutrality, transparency and honesty are non-negotiable. Ethical standards necessarily have to be enforced and stringent action taken against the concerned officer whenever there is any breach of ethical standards as laid down in the All India Services (Conduct) Rules, 1968.Mandamus will not be issued to command Legislature to enact a law, which it is competent to enactThe court added that it Mandamus will not be issued to command Legislature to enact a law. It said:Whether under Article 32 or Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the Court can give directions in order to prevent injustice. This Court and/or a High Court cannot direct the Legislature to enact a particular legislation or the Executive to frame rules. This Court, and/or the High Court, does not give any direction to the State to enforce an Act passed by the Legislature. Nor does the Court enforce instructions in a Departmental Manual not having statutory force, any non-statutory scheme or concession which does not give rise to any legal right in favour of the Petitioner, far less, any recommendation made by an authority such as the Election Commission. It is for the Union of India to take a decision on the recommendation of the Election Commission, in accordance with law. It is not for this Court to decide what should be the policy of the Government. Policy matters are never interfered with, unless patently arbitrary, unreasonable or violative of Article 14 of the Constitution.The Court cannot even issue a Mandamus to the Government for enforcement of a Cabinet decision. It is only when an administrative order confers rights or creates estoppel against the Government, that Mandamus can be issued to enforce the circular. Similarly a Mandamus may be issued to cancel an administrative order, which violates the rules of fairness.Writ Petition is barred by the principles of res judicataThe court also noted that the Petitioner had filed a similar Writ Petition in the High Court of Jharkhand which had been dismissed. While dismissing the writ petition, the court noted: The order of dismissal appears to have been accepted by the Petitioner. The Petitioner did not question the order in this Court. This Writ Petition is barred by the principles of res judicata and/or principles analogous thereto.Case detailsVivek Krishna vs Union of India | 2022 LiveLaw (SC) 436 | WP(C) 1034/2021 | 18 April...

'Political Neutrality Must For Civil Servants', Says Supreme Court While Refusing To Impose 'Cooling Off' Period To Join Politics After Retirement

Ashok KM

Tags