While initiating action for enforcing accountability of Public Servants for their alleged misconduct, either under Departmental DA Regulations or under the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988, safeguards, against misdirected or unwarranted action against officers are in-built in each process and each stage. Conducting departmental inquiry after charge sheeting a public servant has to be done to prove the charges strictly adhering a quasi-judicial approach and duly extending principles of natural justice to the delinquent officer. The delinquent officer can thus be punished only, if he has actually committed a misconduct, as evidenced by material produced, providing him full opportunity to rebut the same, through cross-examination of management witness or through evidences introduced on his behalf for his defence. These are more elaborately dealt with in the project dealing with Departmental Inquiry.

Similarly there are in-built safeguards against misuse or misdirected action in the formalities prescribed for prosecuting a public a servant under the provisions of Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988. These are described in detail in the Legal Supplement under the chapters covering the provisions of the Prevention of Corruption Act.

The provisions intended to safeguard and prevent unwarranted abuse or harmful action under the Act is provided in Chapter V of the ACT titled "Sanction for Prosecution & Other Miscellaneous Provisions". The Act provides powerful and effective tools, but these should be used only by the most responsible persons at senior levels, and that too only after consulting and obtaining the prior sanction of an equally competent public authority. These are the essence of the safeguards provided in the Chapter V of the ACT to ward off hasty or unwarranted abuse of the enforcement provisions of the ACT.

While the objectives of the system are fair and equitable and intended for application to exceptional cases of malfeasance on the part of public servants, the human agencies that enforce these provisions may frequently turn subjective and put them to misuse. As a result despite all these safeguards, justice happens to be very frequently miscarried and innocent public servants fall victims to arbitrary action based on personal vindictiveness of the controlling officers, or when they are seen as a convenient scapegoat for misconduct of others more powerfully placed, who could ward off action, shifting the blame on the less protected. "It is seen that this cap fits your head, and so you are its owner. You are to keep wearing this." And you may land in such a situation. Power corrupts and hence do not expect people who hold power to always behave like angels. What are the remedies to the Public Servant in such a case of misuse of power and authority, which may happen quite frequently.

The recourses available to him in such an extreme contingency are

1. seeking writ remedies in High Courts or the Supreme Court of India or

2. availing civil remedies by filing civil suits in lower courts under the provisions of the Specific Relief Act.

These ultimate remedies are what may be called the protective shields of the last resort. These are discussed in the following pages. The constitutional safeguards provided for government servants in terms of Article 311 is extended to Public Servants through independent DA Regulations under statutory provisions. Understanding these Constitutional Safeguards to civil servants, will enable you to grasp the underlying principles and foundation on which our DA Regulations are built.

There are six chapters covered by this project under three titles. The particulars of the titles with hyperlinks for direct access to them is provided in the Margin to the left at the top.