Document Fragment View

Matching Fragments

10. Legislature has recognised such code of conduct in order to maintain discipline in the administration in Government Departments, Government Organisations as well as in Educational Institutions. Government Servants' Conduct Rules, 1960 was enacted by the Government of Kerala in accordance with the proviso to Article 309 of the Constitution of India. Rule 67(1) of the Government Servants' Conduct Rules reads as follows:

"67. Taking part in politics an delections. - (1)No Government servant shall be a member of or be otherwise associated with, any political party or any organization which takes part in politics nor shall be take part in, subscribe in aid of, or assist in any other manner, any political movement or activity.

11. The Apex Court in M.H. Devendrappa v. Karnataka State Small Industries Development Corporation (1998 (3) SCC 732) had occasion to consider the scope of Rule 22 of the Service Rules applicable to Karnataka State Small Industries Development Corporation. Contention was raised that Rule 22 would amount to curtailment of freedom of speech and expression or the freedom to form association or union. Upholding the action of the Department the Apex Court took the view that a proper balancing of interests of an individual as a citizen and the right of the State to frame a Code of Conduct for its employees in the interest of proper functioning of the State is required. In order to maintain discipline and orderly administration it is always possible for the State Government, educational authorities etc. to lay down their own conduct rules. We have referred to various such provisions under the Kerala Education Rules as well as to the various provisions in the Mahatma Gandhi University statutes. Educational institutions run either by the majority community or minority community under Article 19(1)(g) and Articles 29(1) and (2) as well as Article 30 of the Constitution, can lay down their own code of conduct to uphold their constitutional rights. It is in exercise of those rights they have laid down code of conduct for students to maintain discipline and for orderly administration. Therefore, Clause 9 of the General Discipline laid by the St. Thomas College, Palai is valid and legal and in consonance with Articles 19(1)(g), 29(1), (2) and 30(1) of the Constitution of India.

13. In M.H. Devendrappa's case, supra (1998 (3) SCC 732) the Apex Court dealt with the inter-relationship between Article 19(1)(a) and 19(1 )(c) of the Constitution of India and held as follows:

"The fundamental freedoms enumerated under Article 19 are not necessarily and in all circumstances mutually supportive, although taken together they weave a fabric of a free and equal democratic society, eg., the right to reside and settle in any part of the country can be put in jeopardy by the vociferous local group freely expressing its view against persons from another part of the country. Freedom of speech of one affects the freedom of movement of another. Exercising the right to form an association may curtail the freedom to express views against its activities. For example, a person joining an association to promote adoptions cannot express anti-adoption views. He may lose his membership. Some restriction on one's rights may be necessary to protect another's rights in a given situation. Proper exercise of rights may have, implicit in them, certain restrictions. The rights must be harmoniously construed so that they are properly promoted with the minimum of such implied and necessary restrictions. In the present case, joining Government service has implicit in it, if not explicity so laid down, the observance of a certain code of conduct necessary for the proper discharge of functions as a Government servant. That code cannot be flouted in the name of other freedoms. Of course, the courts will be vigilant to see that the code is not so widely framed as to unreasonably restrict fundamental freedoms. But a reasonable code designed to promote discipline and efficiency can be enforced by the Government organisation in the sense that those who flout it can be subjected to disciplinary action.