Skip to main content

New Govt of India move to harass, persecute 'free-thinking' former officials: Ex-babus

Bureaucrat-turned-activist Harsh Mander
Counterview Desk 
The Constitutional Conduct Group (CCG), consisting of retired civil servants, protesting against the amendments to the All India Services, has said the aim of the Government of India move is to armed itself with “unlimited powers to harass and persecute any pensioner, whose action is not to its liking, whether it be an article, an interview, participation in a protest march or seminar, or any form of criticism.
Without naming Harsh Mander, bureaucrat-turned-activist, who is alleged to be a victim of state harassment for his human rights campaigns, the CCG statement, signed by 94 signatories, said, “In effect, this will totally muzzle and silence anyone who draws a pension from the state, which appears to be the intention behind these amendments.”


The Constitutional Conduct Group, a collective of former civil servants, has noted with concern the recent amendments by the Ministry of Personnel, Public Grievances and Pensioners, Govt. of India, to the All India Services (Death cum Retirement Benefits) Rules 1958 (hereinafter referred to as the Rules). Through a notification dated 6.7.2023, these amendments have, inter alia, sought to impose a complete ban on the right of retired civil servants to comment on public matters, by threatening them with the withdrawal of their pensions. This would be violative of Article 51A of the Constitution which enjoins upon all citizens to “cherish and follow the noble ideals that inspired the national struggle for freedom.” The right to criticise the government in power is part of these ideals and cannot be termed as “misconduct” .
The original Rules of 1958 (as amended from time to time) did contain a provision in Rule 3 that “future good conduct shall be an implied condition of every grant of pension and its continuation” and that the pension could be withheld or withdrawn, in part or in full, if the pensioner is convicted of a serious crime or is held to be guilty of grave misconduct. However, such action could only be taken by the union government on a reference from the state government (the cadre to which the officer belonged). But now, Rule 3 has been amended to provide that such punitive action can be taken by the union government “either on a reference from the state government concerned or otherwise.” This, we feel, violates the principles of federalism and confers draconian powers of oversight and overrule on the union government which is not in conformity with the duality of control envisaged in the All India Services structure. It will further expose officers in opposition ruled states to intimidation by the party in power at the centre.
We note with apprehension that nowhere in the Rules has the term “good conduct” or “grave misconduct” been defined, other than in sub-rule 8 of Rule 3 which merely “includes” disclosure of any information covered by the Official Secrets Act as a grave misconduct. Other than this, however, the Rules are completely silent on this issue, and everything is left to the decision or interpretation of the central government. Considering the severe penalties prescribed for misconduct, it is legally incumbent on the union government to have provided an exhaustive definition of the term. By leaving this deliberately vague, ambiguous and amorphous, the union government has armed itself with unlimited powers to harass and persecute any pensioner whose action is not to its liking, whether it be an article, an interview, participation in a protest march or seminar, or any form of criticism. In effect, this will totally muzzle and silence anyone who draws a pension from the state, which appears to be the intention behind these amendments.
The withdrawal/withholding of pension for any criminal conviction is equally pernicious and untenable in law as it amounts to double jeopardy, punishing a person twice for the same offence. The pension is something (s)he has already earned by dint of long service. If (s)he commits a crime, (s)he will suffer the consequences of that by the operation of that criminal law: (s)he cannot be penalised a second time for the same offence by withdrawing her/his pension. Furthermore, the law punishes the perpetrator of a crime, not her/his next of kin; by withdrawing/withholding her/his pension the government would be inflicting unjustified tribulations and misery on her/his family too.
Finally, both the original and the amended provision of Rule 3 (except the newly introduced sub-rule 6 about divulging secret and security related information) violate multiple rulings of the Supreme Court and various High Courts which have, over the last 65 years, constantly held that pension is an employee’s right and a kind of deferred payment for service already rendered. It is not largesse or charity bestowed by the government and does not depend upon the discretion of the government (State of Punjab and Another vs Iqbal Singh).
Pensioners are not government servants: they are free citizens of the country like any other citizen, with the same freedom of expression
In DS Nakara vs Union of India (1983), the Supreme Court held that a law cannot discriminate between the same class of people, and that all statutes or laws must have some rational nexus with the object of the law. Rule 3, both the original and the amended versions, do not conform to these legal requirements. Pensioners are no longer government servants: they are free citizens of the country like any other citizen, with the same freedom of expression. By curbing this right under the specious guise of “good conduct” the government is discriminating against them and, therefore, also violating Article 14 of the Constitution. Furthermore, what is the “object” of this rule, if not to silence any form of criticism of the government? This cannot be held to be rational, reasonable or based on some valid principle, as is required in another judgment (Ramana Dayaram Shetty vs The Airport Authority of India and Others).
Rule 3 has become obsolete: it is a legal anachronism which also militates against the right to freedom of speech and dissent. It makes pensioners bonded labourers for life, a separate-and inferior-class of citizens who do not enjoy the freedom of expression. It further seeks to impose the Conduct Rules (which apply only to those in service of the government) on pensioners through the back door, which is abhorrent in law, as the latter are no longer in service. They are free citizens and there exists no employer-employee relationship between them and the government.
Rules governing conditions of service need to be dynamic and in sync with the changes in interpretation of laws, the evolution of jurisprudence on rights and freedoms, the development of the concepts of democracy and an open society. Rule 3 fails to do so, is stuck in a time warp and needs to go.
The Constitutional Conduct Group urges the governments in the states and the union government to review this rule with a view to abolishing it, and not to further build upon it. In the interim we further request the union government to hold in abeyance these amendments in the interests of federalism, fair play, equality of citizens, freedom of expression and a vibrant democracy.
Satyameva Jayate
Click here for signatories



Avoidable Narmada floods: Modi birthday fete caused long wait for release of dam waters

Counterview Desk  Top advocacy group, South Asia Network on Dams, Rivers and People (SANDRP), has accused the Sardar Sarovar dam operators for once again acting in an "unaccountable" manner, bringing "avoidable floods in downstream Gujarat."  In a detailed analysis, SANDRP has said that the water level at the Golden Bridge in Bharuch approached the highest flood level on September 17, 2023, but these "could have been significantly lower and much less disastrous" both for the upstream and downstream areas of the dam, if the authorities had taken action earlier based on available actionable information.

Biden urged to warn Modi: US can declare India as worst religious freedom offender

By Our Representative  During a Congressional Briefing held on Capitol Hill, Washington DC, Nadine Maenza, former Chair of the United States Commission on International Religious Freedom (USCIRF), has wondered why the Biden administration should raise issues of mass anti-minority mob violence  -- particularly in Haryana and Manipur -- with Modi. Modi should be told that if such violence continues, the US will be “compelled by law” to designate India as one of the world’s worst offenders of religious freedom, she urged.

From 'Naatu-Naatu' to 'Nipah-Nipah': Dancing to the tune of western pipers?

By Dr Amitav Banerjee, MD*  Some critics have commented that the ecstatic response of most Indians to the Oscar for the racy Indian song, “Naatu-Naatu” from the film, “RRR” reeks of sheer racism, insulting visuals and a colonial hangover. It was perhaps these ingredients that impressed the Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences, one critic says.

A Hindu alternative to Valentine's Day? 'Shiv-Parvati was first love marriage in Universe'

By Rajiv Shah*   The other day, I was searching on Google a quote on Maha Shivratri which I wanted to send to someone, a confirmed Shiv Bhakt, quite close to me -- with an underlying message to act positively instead of being negative. On top of the search, I chanced upon an article in, imagine!, a Nashik Corporation site which offered me something very unusual. 

Buddhist shrines were 'massively destroyed' by Brahmanical rulers: Historian DN Jha

Nalanda mahavihara By Our Representative Prominent historian DN Jha, an expert in India's ancient and medieval past, in his new book , "Against the Grain: Notes on Identity, Intolerance and History", in a sharp critique of "Hindutva ideologues", who look at the ancient period of Indian history as "a golden age marked by social harmony, devoid of any religious violence", has said, "Demolition and desecration of rival religious establishments, and the appropriation of their idols, was not uncommon in India before the advent of Islam".

Asset managers hold '2.8 times more equity' in fossil fuel cos than in green investments

By Deepanwita Gita Niyogi*  The world’s largest asset managers are far off track to meet the  2050 net zero commitments , a new study  released by InfluenceMap , a London-based think tank working on climate change and sustainability, says. Released on August 1, the Asset Managers and Climate Change 2023 report by FinanceMap, a work stream of InfluenceMap, finds that the world’s largest asset managers have not improved on their climate performance in the past two years.

Evading primary responsibility, ONGC decides to invest Rs 15,000 crore in sick subsidiary

By NS Venkataraman*  It is reported that Oil and Natural Gas Corporation (ONGC) will infuse about Rs 15,000 crore in ONGC Petro-additions Ltd (OPaL) as part of a financial restructuring exercise. ONGC currently holds 49.36 per cent stake in (OPaL), which operates a mega petrochemical plant at Dahej in Gujarat. GAIL (India) Ltd has 49.21 per cent interest and Gujarat State Petrochemical Corporation (GSPC) has the remaining 1.43 per cent.

Savarkar 'criminally betrayed' Netaji and his INA by siding with the British rulers

By Shamsul Islam* RSS-BJP rulers of India have been trying to show off as great fans of Netaji. But Indians must know what role ideological parents of today's RSS/BJP played against Netaji and Indian National Army (INA). The Hindu Mahasabha and RSS which always had prominent lawyers on their rolls made no attempt to defend the INA accused at Red Fort trials.

Sales, profits of Indian firms 'deteriorate', yet no significant increase in cost pressures

By Our Representative  The Indian Institute of Management-Ahmedabad's (IIM-A's) latest Business Inflation Expectations Survey (BIES), a monthly exercise, has said that while cost perceptions data does not indicate significant increase of cost pressures, sales and profits of the Indian firms have deteriorated.

'State-sanctioned terror': Stop drone attack on Adivasis, urge over 80 world academics

Counterview Desk  A joint statement, “Indigenous Peoples’ Un-Freedoms and Our Academic Freedom: A Call for Solidarity”, endorsed by over 80 signatories, including international academics, activists and civil society organizations, as well as diasporic Indian academics and researchers, working with Adivasi (indigenous) communities in India, has made an urgent appeal to prevent future drone bomb attacks by the Indian state on Adivasi villages.