IAS officers are public servants, not MPs or MLAs. Why is this so?

Although the Delhi court has granted significant relief to Unnao rape convict and former MLA Kuldeep Singh Sengar by suspending his jail sentence, it has refused to recognize Sengar as a public servant. Citing the 1984 AR Antulay case, the court now questions the Indian democracy: if an IAS officer or other government employee is considered a public servant, why are MPs and MLAs not legally considered public servants?

Who is a public servant?

In simple terms, anyone holding a public office to serve the public is considered a public servant. In this sense, an IAS officer or police officer, a clerk or peon, and an MP or MLA are all performing public service. However, each term has a technical definition in the law, which determines which law applies to whom and in what form. Supreme Court advocate Ashwani Kumar Dubey says that the legal definition of a public servant is found primarily in two places: Section 21 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) and the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988. These sections determine who will be considered a public servant and prosecuted for crimes such as bribery, corruption, and abuse of power.

They argue that Section 21 of the IPC lists judges, military officers, and government servants as public servants, but does not explicitly mention MPs or MLAs. The Prevention of Corruption Act, meanwhile, has separate provisions that consider MPs and MLAs public servants in corruption cases. Under Section 2(c) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988, any person performing a public duty is a public servant.

MPs and MLAs are elected representatives of the people. According to the Supreme Court’s decision in the P.V. Narasimha Rao case, MPs and MLAs are not full-time salaried employees, but rather are public office holders. Consequently, they can practice other professions, such as law, while serving as MPs and MLAs, which an IAS, IPS, or other government employee cannot.

Why are IAS and other government officials public servants?

Section 21 of the Indian Penal Code defines public servants. This broad definition includes those in the service of the government, those appointed to discharge a public duty, officials charged with public property, revenue, judicial functions, and other matters, and members/officers of institutions such as panchayats, municipalities, government corporations, and authorities with statutory responsibilities.

IAS, IPS, State Administrative Service, Police, Patwari, Tehsildar, Collector, Secretary, etc. are all appointed in the Government Service. Their appointment, promotion, disciplinary action, suspension, dismissal, etc., are all governed by rules/service regulations. Article 309 of the Constitution and related service rules (such as the All India Services Rules) regulate these. Therefore, when an IAS officer accepts a bribe or misuses it, sections of the Indian Penal Code, the Prevention of Corruption Act, and departmental service rules all apply, as they are legally a public servant.

Are MPs and MLAs public servants or not?

This is where the biggest confusion arises. Technically, we have to discuss the issue on two levels. The simple answer is no. MPs and MLAs are not government employees. They are neither appointed under any department nor are they subject to the normal civil service rules. They are constitutional officials elected by the people.

Their status is independent of the government. They are members of Parliament and state legislatures, not employees of the executive branch. Therefore, they are not classified as public servants under Article 309 or the Government Service Rules, as are officers like the IAS and IPS.

The second question is whether MPs and MLAs are public servants under criminal law. The issue here is quite nuanced. The Supreme Court has held in several important judgments that MPs and MLAs are public servants for the purposes of the Prevention of Corruption Act because they perform public duties and make important decisions involving public funds, policies, and parliamentary work.

For example, in PV Narasimha Rao vs. State (CBI/SPE), 1998, the Supreme Court discussed the status of Members of Parliament in detail. The Court held that MPs are not government employees, but they are public servants in the sense that they are accountable to the public and that the abuse of their position can amount to corruption.

Furthermore, in interpreting the Prevention of Corruption Act, the courts have clarified that public representatives who accept bribes, accept money for the abuse of their position, or manipulate government contracts, policies, or benefits can be prosecuted under the same corruption provisions as public servants. That is, MPs and MLAs are considered public servants under criminal law (specifically anti-corruption law), but they are not government officials governed by service rules.

Why was the constitutional framework kept separate?

The Indian Constitution rests on three main pillars.

1. Legislature, Parliament, Legislative Assemblies
2. Executive: Government, Cabinet, Bureaucracy (IAS etc.)
3. Judiciary

IAS and other government officers are part of the executive, used by the Council of Ministers to implement policies. MPs and MLAs are part of the legislature, whose job is to make laws, hold the government accountable, pass the budget, and debate policies. If MPs and MLAs were declared government employees in the same way as IAS officers, their independence and ability to monitor the government would be weakened. Therefore, the Constitution designated them as an independent category and created separate political and legal mechanisms for accountability for their conduct.

• Election Commission and the Representation of the People Act, 1951
• Disqualification rules such as termination of membership on conviction of certain offences under Section 8
• Privileges of Parliament, Legislative Assemblies Articles 105, 194

Because of this structure, MPs and MLAs cannot face direct departmental action or suspension, as they would for an IAS officer. The main weapons against them are criminal prosecution, punishment and imprisonment, and/or disqualification from membership.

The dilemma of definition and the question of accountability

In short, IAS and other government officers are government employees and public servants under the Constitution and service rules. They are subject to departmental action, suspension, dismissal, etc. MPs and MLAs are not government employees, but constitutionally elected officials. They are considered public servants for the purposes of criminal and corruption laws, but not within the meaning of government service rules.

The public naturally expects that the higher the position, the more stringent the accountability. This problem is less a matter of definition and more a matter of political and institutional accountability. Only through a combination of strict laws, transparent policies, timely justice, and an informed electorate can we ensure that everyone, whether IAS, MP, or MLA, who exercises public power, truly serves as a public servant.