UPSC

India constitution 2006 1 4. Photo: Wikimedia Commons · Public domain · source

1. Constitutional position and institutional purpose

UPSC is a constitutional institution, not a statutory body created by an ordinary Act of Parliament. Article 315 provides for a Public Service Commission for the Union and one for each State. Its central purpose is to support impartial, merit-based recruitment and provide expert advice on specified personnel matters. It is neither a ministry nor the employer of all persons selected through its examinations. Appointment orders, allocation of services and cadre administration remain functions of the competent government authorities.

India’s first Public Service Commission was established on 1 October 1926 following the Lee Commission’s recommendations. The Government of India Act, 1935 provided for a Federal Public Service Commission; the Constitution established UPSC in its present constitutional framework from 26 January 1950. This evolution reflects the transition from limited recruitment safeguards under colonial administration to an independent institution serving a democratic government.

The Constitution also permits two or more States to have a Joint State Public Service Commission. This requires resolutions by the legislatures concerned and a parliamentary law. Under Article 315(4), UPSC may, with the President’s approval, agree to serve the needs of a State when requested by its Governor. These arrangements should not be confused with routine recruitment by State Public Service Commissions.

UPSC is not an attached office of the Department of Personnel and Training.
It does not conduct every recruitment examination for the Union; bodies such as the Staff Selection Commission have separate responsibilities.
Its recruitment mandate includes examinations beyond the Civil Services Examination.

2. Composition, appointment and tenure

Under Article 316, the President appoints the Chairperson and other members of UPSC. The Constitution does not prescribe a fixed membership strength. Article 318 authorises the President to determine the number of members and their conditions of service through regulations, and to make provision concerning the Commission’s staff. As nearly as may be, half the members must have held office for at least ten years under the Government of India or a State government.

A member holds office for six years from entering office or until attaining 65 years, whichever occurs earlier. For a State or Joint State Public Service Commission, the corresponding age limit is 62 years. A UPSC member may resign by writing to the President. Where the Chairperson’s office is vacant, or the Chairperson is unable to perform duties, the President may appoint another member to discharge those duties.

Article 319 restricts future government employment to reduce incentives for favour-seeking. The UPSC Chairperson is ineligible for further employment under the Union or a State government. A UPSC member other than the Chairperson may become Chairperson of UPSC or a State Public Service Commission, but is otherwise ineligible for such government employment. A member cannot be reappointed to the same office after expiry of the term.

The ten-year government-service requirement applies to approximately half the membership, not to every member.
Appointment by the President does not mean members hold office at the President’s unrestricted pleasure.

Removal for misbehaviour under Article 317

1. An allegation of misbehaviour concerns the Chairperson or a member.
2. The President refers the matter to the Supreme Court.
3. The Supreme Court conducts an inquiry; suspension may operate pending the reference.
4. The Court reports whether the person ought to be removed.
5. If removal is warranted by the Court’s report, the President may issue the removal order.

3. Independence, removal and financial safeguards

Article 317 provides security of tenure. For removal on the ground of misbehaviour, the President must refer the matter to the Supreme Court. After an inquiry conducted under the prescribed procedure, the Court must report that the person ought to be removed before the President can remove that person on this ground. The President may suspend a UPSC Chairperson or member while this reference is pending.

The President may also remove a member without a Supreme Court inquiry on three specified grounds: adjudicated insolvency; engaging during the term in paid employment outside official duties; or being, in the President’s opinion, unfit to continue because of infirmity of mind or body. Article 317 additionally treats certain interests in government contracts or agreements as misbehaviour, subject to its stated exception concerning participation as an ordinary member of an incorporated company.

Article 318 prevents conditions of service from being varied to a member’s disadvantage after appointment. Article 322 charges the Commission’s expenses, including relevant salaries, allowances and pensions, on the Consolidated Fund of India. Charged expenditure is not submitted to Parliament’s vote, though it may be discussed. Together with restricted post-tenure employment, these provisions protect institutional autonomy without exempting UPSC from legal scrutiny.

Removal of a State Public Service Commission member is also by the President, not the Governor.
For a State Commission, the Governor may order suspension while a presidential reference to the Supreme Court is pending.

UPSC and State Public Service Commissions: key constitutional distinctions
Feature	UPSC	State Public Service Commission
Appointment	President	Governor
Tenure	Six years or age 65, whichever is earlier	Six years or age 62, whichever is earlier
Removal	President under Article 317	President under Article 317
Expenses	Charged on Consolidated Fund of India	Charged on Consolidated Fund of the State
Annual report	President lays it before both Houses of Parliament	Governor lays it before the State legislature

4. Functions, consultation and constitutional limits

Article 320 makes conducting examinations for appointments to Union services a core UPSC function. It also envisages consultation on methods of recruitment, principles governing appointments, promotions and transfers between services, and candidates’ suitability for such actions. Consultation extends to disciplinary matters, specified claims for reimbursement of legal expenses incurred in defending acts done in official duty, and compensation claims relating to injuries sustained while serving the government.

When requested by two or more States, UPSC assists in framing and operating joint recruitment schemes for services requiring special qualifications. Under Article 321, Parliament may confer additional functions on UPSC concerning Union services and services of local authorities, bodies corporate constituted by law, or public institutions. The corresponding power regarding a State Commission belongs to the State legislature.

Consultation is not universal. Regulations under the proviso to Article 320(3) may identify matters where consultation is unnecessary; the relevant regulations must be laid before Parliament. Article 320(4) specifically excludes mandatory consultation regarding the manner of making provision under Article 16(4) and giving effect to Article 335. UPSC therefore implements applicable recruitment rules but does not independently determine reservation policy.

UPSC recommends candidates; the competent government authority makes appointments.
It is not responsible for civil servants’ general training, routine postings or overall cadre management.
Recruitment rules and examination notifications determine the procedure applicable to a particular selection.

5. Accountability, judicial interpretation and contemporary relevance

Article 323 requires UPSC to submit an annual report to the President. The President must place it before both Houses of Parliament together with a memorandum explaining cases where the Commission’s advice was not accepted and the reasons for non-acceptance. Its advice is thus generally not binding, but rejecting it can trigger public and parliamentary scrutiny.

In State of U.P. v. Manbodhan Lal Srivastava (1957), the Supreme Court held that Article 320(3)(c), concerning consultation in disciplinary matters, was directory rather than mandatory in the sense argued before it. Non-consultation did not itself give a public servant a cause of action to invalidate the disciplinary decision. This must not be read as permission to disregard natural justice, Article 311 or binding statutory service rules.

UPSC’s contemporary challenges include maintaining examination integrity, providing accessible procedures for persons with disabilities, managing large applicant volumes and balancing transparency with confidentiality. Reform should preserve equal opportunity under Articles 14 and 16 while improving recruitment speed and administrative suitability. Constitutional independence protects the recruitment process; it does not make selection decisions immune from judicial review for illegality, arbitrariness or procedural unfairness.

Prelims distinction: independence of the Commission is different from binding authority of its advice.
Mains linkage: impartial recruitment supports administrative neutrality, public trust and equality of opportunity.

Real-world case studies

Consultation does not replace procedural fairness

In Union of India v. S.K. Kapoor (2011), the Supreme Court held that where UPSC’s report is relied upon in disciplinary proceedings, a copy must be supplied in advance to the employee so that the employee can rebut it. The decision illustrates that advisory consultation and the employee’s right to a fair hearing are distinct issues.

Previous year questions

No UPSC question has been asked directly on this micro-topic yet. Use the practice questions below.

Practice questions

Practice MCQ 1

Consider the following statements about UPSC: 1. The Constitution fixes its total number of members. 2. As nearly as may be, half its members must have held government office for at least ten years. 3. A member’s conditions of service cannot be varied to their disadvantage after appointment. Which statements are correct?

A. 1 and 2 only
B. 2 and 3 only
C. 1 and 3 only
D. 1, 2 and 3

Practice MCQ 2

Which situation permits the President to remove a UPSC member without first obtaining a Supreme Court inquiry report under Article 317?

A. An allegation of favouritism amounting to misbehaviour
B. Disagreement with the government’s recruitment policy
C. Engaging during the term in paid employment outside official duties
D. Submission of advice rejected by the government

Practice MCQ 3

Consider the following statements: 1. UPSC’s expenses are charged on the Consolidated Fund of India. 2. UPSC must be consulted on the manner of making reservations under Article 16(4). 3. Reasons for non-acceptance of UPSC’s advice must accompany its annual report when placed before Parliament. Which statements are correct?

A. 1 only
B. 2 and 3 only
C. 1 and 3 only
D. 1, 2 and 3

Mains practice · UPSC combines constitutional independence with an advisory relationship to the executive. Examine how this arrangement supports merit-based administration and democratic accountability. Answer in 250 words.

Introduce UPSC with Articles 315–323 and its impartial recruitment mandate.
Explain tenure protection, removal safeguards, charged expenditure and post-tenure restrictions.
Discuss examination and consultation functions under Article 320.
Distinguish recommendations from executive appointment and policy powers.
Explain annual reporting and disclosure of reasons for rejecting advice under Article 323.
Use Manbodhan Lal Srivastava and S.K. Kapoor to distinguish consultation from procedural fairness.
Conclude with transparent, accessible and timely recruitment without compromising autonomy.