WRITEUP ON CONDUCT RULES

The civil services conduct rule enumerates some specific and some generic misconduct which
can be indulged in by the government servant. The specific conducts which is required to be
followed by every government servant is self explanatory. However the general concepts
require certain elaboration so has to understand the real import of those terms.

3. GENERAL:

(1) Every Government servant shall at all times--

(i) maintain absolute integrity;
(ii) maintain devotion to duty; and
(iii) do nothing which is unbecoming of a Government servant.

DISCUSSION
We will be discussing these terms in the context of quasi-judicial function as the majority of
decision taken in the department are quasi judicial in nature this is not to say that
administrative decisions are not taken in the department however the focus is from the
perspective of conduct which is required to be at here to while dealing with quasi judicial
matter.
 Absolute Integrity: Government servants must demonstrate honesty, probity, and
ethical conduct in all their dealings. Any actions or decisions tainted by personal gain,
bias, or corruption undermine public trust and erode the credibility of the institution.
 Devotion to Duty: Devotion to duty entails a steadfast commitment to fulfilling one's
responsibilities with diligence, and professionalism.
 Unbecoming Conduct: The concept of "doing nothing which is unbecoming of a
Government servant" encompasses behaviors or actions that are inconsistent with the
standards of conduct expected from public officials.
ELUCIDATION
In order to understand these concepts the judgement of Supreme Court in the case of Shri KK
Dhawan which has also been reiterated by the CVC in its circular number 39 / 11/ 07 dated
1st November 2007 is of significant importance. The Supreme Court in judgment has
enumerated the criteria which can be construed as misconduct. The relevant portion of the
same is quoted as under:

“It is one of the cardinal principles of administration of justice that it must be free
from bias of any kind. Certainly, therefore, the officer who exercises judicial or
quasi-judicial powers acts negligently or recklessly or in order to confer undue
favour on a person is not acting as a Judge. It is important to bear in mind that in the
present case, we are not concerned with the correctness or legality of the decision of
the respondent but the conduct of the respondent in discharge of his duties as an
officer. The legality of the orders with reference to the nine assessments may be
questioned in appeal or revision under the Act. But we have no doubt in our mind that
the Government is not precluded from taking the disciplinary action for violation of
the Conduct Rules. Thus, we conclude that the disciplinary action can be taken in the
following cases:

(i) Where the officer had acted in a manner as would reflect on his reputation for
integrity or good faith or devotion to duty;

(ii)if there is prima facie material to show recklessness or misconduct in the

discharge of his duty;

(iii)if he has acted in a manner which is unbecoming of a government servant;

(iv)if he had acted negligently or that he omitted the prescribed conditions which are
essential for the exercise of the statutory powers;

(v) if he had acted in order to unduly favour a party-,

(vi) if he had been actuated by corrupt motive however, small the bribe may be
because Lord Coke said long ago "though the bribe may be small, yet the fault is
great."
CONCEPT
Certain other concepts such as misconduct etc need to be discussed to understand the real
import of the general provision of the conduct rule. The general concept is elucidated in the
diagram below.

INTEGRITY IS
THE ABSENCE
OF

MISCONDUCT
AND GROSS
NEGLIGENCE

CARELESSNESS

NEGLIGENCE RASHNESS

RECKLESSNESS

Carelessness involves inadvertent errors due to a lack of attention or consideration, such as

forgetting to turn off a stove, resulting in unintended consequences. Negligence occurs when
there's a breach of duty, leading to harm or loss because of a failure to meet expected
standards of care. For example, a doctor administering the wrong medication due to
oversight. Recklessness disregards known risks despite awareness of potential harm, like
driving recklessly in hazardous conditions. Rashness is impulsive behavior lacking foresight
or consideration for consequences, such as making impulsive financial decisions without
proper evaluation. Each concept represents a different level of awareness and intent, with
carelessness being unintentional, negligence breaching a duty, recklessness knowingly
disregarding risks, and rashness impulsively acting without thoughtful consideration.
Every concept has a core value and a fringe value. Similarly, every duty has a core and a
fringe. Whatever is at the core of a duty would be the integrity of the duty and whatever is at
the fringe would not be the integrity of the duty but may be integral to the duty. It is in
reference to this metaphysical concept that mottos are chosen by organizations. For
example, in the fire department, the appropriate motto would be: Be always alert. It would be
so for the reason the integrity of the duty of a fire officer i.e. the core value of his work would
be to be ‘always alert’. Similarly, for a doctor, the core value of his work would be ‘duty to
the extra vigilant’. Thus, where a doctor conducts four operations one after the other and in
between does not wash his hands and change the gloves resulting in the three subsequent
patients contacting the disease of the first, notwithstanding there being no moral turpitude

MISCONDUCT
There cannot be any exhaustive definition of misconduct. However, the same as defined in
Blacks Law Dictionary, Sixth Edition at page 999 would mean, thus:
A transgression of some established and definite rule of action, a forbidden act, a
dereliction from duty, unlawful behaviour, wilful in character, improper or wrong
behaviour, its synonyms are misdemeanor, misdeed, misbehavior, delinquency,
impropriety, mismanagement, offense, but not negligence or carelessness

Misconduct in office has been defined as:

Any unlawful behaviour by a public officer in relation to the duties of his office,
wilful in character. Term embraces acts which the office holder had no right to
perform, acts performed improperly, and failure to act in the face of an affirmative
duty to act. The term misconduct implies, a wrongful intention, and not involving
error of judgment. Misconduct is not necessarily the same thing as conduct involving
moral turpitude.

The word misconduct is a relative term and has to be construed with

reference to the subject matter and the context wherein the term
occurs, having regard to the scope of the Act or statute which is being
construed. Misconduct literally means wrong conduct or improper
conduct.
MISCONDUCT - WHAT CONSTITUTES, WHAT DOESN'T?
(A) Misconduct - lack of efficiency
Lack of efficiency and failure to attain the highest standard of administrative ability while
holding high post would not by themselves constitute misconduct. There have to be specific
acts of omission/commission.(Ref: UoI vs J. Ahmed, the then DM, Nowgong Distt, Assam)
#The respondent was a Deputy Commissioner and District Magistrate, Nowgong District,
Assam and there were riots in his District. He was charged with inefficiency, lacking the
quality of leadership, ineptitude, lack of foresight, lack of firmness and indecisiveness. An
enquiry was held and he was imposed the penalty of removal from service.
#A look at the charges framed against the officer showed that he failed to take any effective
preventive measures meaning thereby error in judgment in evaluating developing
situation. He showed complete lack of leadership when disturbances broke out and he
disclosed complete inaptitude, lack of foresight, lack of firmness and capacity to take firm
decision. These are personal qualities which a man holding a post of Deputy Commissioner
would be expected to possess. They may be relevant considerations on the question of
retaining him in the post or for promotion, but such lack of personal quality cannot constitute
misconduct for the purpose of disciplinary proceedings.

(B) Misconduct: negligence in discharge of duty.

Carelessness: It can often be productive of more harm than deliberate wickedness or
malevolence. Leaving aside the classic example of the sentry who sleeps at his post and
allows the enemy to slip through, there are other more familiar (examples) instances of which
(are) a railway cabin man signalling in a train on the same track where there is a stationary
train causing headlong collision; a nurse giving intravenous injection which ought to be given
intramuscular causing instantaneous death; a pilot overlooking an instrument showing snag in
engine and the aircraft crashing causing heavy loss of life.

Negligence: There may be negligence in the performance of duty and a lapse in performance
of duty or error of judgment in evaluating the developing situation may be negligence in
discharge of duty but would not constitute misconduct unless the consequences directly
attributable to negligence would be such as to be irreparable or the resultant damage would
be so heavy that the degree of culpability would be very high. An error can be indicative of
negligence and the degree of culpability may indicate the grossness of the negligence.

(C) Misconduct: mens rea:Gross habitual negligence in performance of duty may not
involve mens rea but still constitutes misconduct
UNBECOMING OF A GOVERNMENT SERVANT
"do nothing which is unbecoming of a Government servant" may be either in relation to his
duties of office as well as to his private life. This rule enjoins a Government servant at all
times whether in office or outside to do nothing which is improper or inappropriate or
unsuited to his position as a Government servant.If the Government servant is asked to do
nothing which is unbecoming of a Government servant, he is merely asked to keep within the
bounds of administrative decency. What is unbecoming can always be ascertained, having
regard to the entirety of conduct.

ABSOLUTE INTEGRITY AND DEVOTION TO DUTY.

Failure to come up to the highest expectations of an officer holding a responsible post or lack
of aptitude or qualities of leadership would not constitute as failure to maintain devotion to
duty, and that the expression devotion to duty, had been used as something opposed to
indifference to duty or easy-going or light-hearted approach to duty. An act or omission
which runs counter to the expected code of conduct constitutes misconduct.

WHEN UNAUTHORISED ABSENCE FROM DUTY AMOUNTS

TO FAILURE OF DEVOTION TO DUTY?
As per para 2 (2)- Rule 25 of CCS (Leave) Rule, 1972 of OM.13026/3/2010-Esstt (Leave)
dated 22.06.2010 of DoPT; Wilful absence of duty after expiry of leave liable to disciplinary
action. The action is to be taken by the Leave sanctioning Authority (LSA)/ Disciplinary
Authority (DA) in case of Unauthorized / Wilful Absence.
Compelling Circumstances vs Wilful Absence
Krushnakant B. Parmar v. Union Of India And Another, SUPREME COURT FEB 15, 2012
The disciplinary authority alleged that he failed to maintain devotion to duty and his
behaviour was unbecoming of a government servant. It was noted by the Apex Court that the
question whether "unauthorised absence from duty" amounts to failure of devotion to duty or
behaviour unbecoming of a government servant cannot be decided without deciding the
question whether absence is wilful or because of compelling circumstances.
If the absence is the result of compelling circumstances under which it was not
possible to report or perform duty, such absence cannot be held to be wilful. Absence from
duty without any application or prior permission may amount to unauthorised absence, but it
does not always mean wilful. There may be different eventualities due to which an employee
may abstain from duty, including compelling circumstances beyond his control like illness,
accident, hospitalisation, etc., but in such case the employee cannot be held guilty of failure
of devotion to duty or behaviour unbecoming of a government servant. Hence, in a
departmental proceeding, if allegation of unauthorised absence from duty is made, the
disciplinary authority is required to prove that the absence is wilful, in the absence of such
finding the absence will not amount to misconduct.
INTEGRITY IS THE ABSENCE OF

MISCONDUCT AND
GROSS NEGLIGENCE

NEGLIGENCE

CARELESSNESS
RASHNESS

RECKLESSNESS