Rule 22A — CCS

No employee shall employ a child below the age of 14 years as a domestic servant or for any personal or professional purpose. Any violation of this rule is treated as serious misconduct and is subject to disciplinary action39 .

Government employees are expected to promote child welfare and set an example by adhering to laws related to child rights and protection.

Rule 22A: Prohibition Regarding Employment of Children Below 14 Years Government servants must not engage in or support child labour, ensuring compliance with national child protection laws.

The final provisions of the CCS (Conduct) Rules, 1964, clarify interpretation, delegation of powers, and repeal of earlier regulations.

The government reserves the right to interpret these rules and issue additional clarifications as needed. Departments may delegate specific powers related to conduct enforcement, provided such delegations comply with the overall framework of civil service regulations40 .

With the introduction of these rules, earlier conflicting provisions are repealed to maintain consistency in administrative guidelines.

This chapter highlights the prohibitions placed on government servants to maintain discipline, ethical conduct, and compliance with national laws. Restrictions on substance use, child employment, and adherence to civil service regulations reinforce the principles of responsible governance.

The takeaway Point: While many dos and don’ts have been prescribed in the above rules, their scope is not restricted to these dos and don’ts only and its scope may enlarge under Rule 3

(iii) i.e. “EVERY GOVERNMENT SERVANT SHALL AT ALL TIMES DO NOTHING WHICH IS UNBECOMING OF A GOVERNMENT SERVANT 41 ”

38 Ibid., Rule 22. 39 Ibid., Rule 22A; see also Government of India. (1986). Child Labour (Prohibition and Regulation) Act, 1986, Section 3. 40 Ibid., Rules 23–25. 41 Ibid., Rule 3(1)(iii).

Reflective Situation: The Dilemma of an Officer Meera, a mid-level officer in a central government department, has recently received a formal invitation from an NGO where her sister is employed. The NGO is organizing a public event to recognize individuals who have contributed to women’s empowerment. Meera is among those selected to be felicitated.

Solution (One Reasoned Possibility): This situation presents overlapping concerns of public recognition, association with external organizations, and public expression, all of which are governed by the CCS (Conduct) Rules.

Although the event is apolitical and not funded by any government body, the NGO has received some grants from Meera’s department in the past, including during the financial year in which the felicitation is scheduled.

Simultaneously, Meera has been asked by her close friend—a well-known journalist—to contribute an article for a widely circulated magazine on the challenges faced by working women in the bureaucracy. The article would reflect her personal experiences, not government policies. However, the magazine is known to carry editorials critical of government functioning.

Meera is proud of her work and wishes to accept the honour and share her experiences through the article. Yet, she is also mindful of her obligations under the CCS (Conduct) Rules, 1964, especially concerning Rules 8, 14, and 19.

She now faces a critical choice: should she attend the felicitation and write the article—or should she refrain from both to avoid violating the conduct rules?

However, the felicitation is part of a broader event on women’s empowerment and not solely focused on Meera. If she feels the recognition is meritorious and not an attempt to influence her, one possible course of action is to seek prior written permission from the competent authority. This not only aligns with the rules but also demonstrates transparency and good faith.

Regarding the felicitation: Rule 14 of the CCS (Conduct) Rules prohibits public demonstrations or receptions in honour of a government servant if they are organized by individuals or bodies that have official dealings with the government servant’s department. Since the NGO has received grants from Meera’s department, and her sister is employed there, attending the felicitation could give rise to perceptions of partiality or favouritism—even if unintended.

Regarding the article: Rule 8 restricts government servants from contributing to publications of a political or controversial nature. Even though the magazine is known for critical views, Meera's proposed article is anecdotal and not policy critical. Nonetheless, Rule 19 also bars self-vindication or self-promotion through public platforms unless duly authorized.

In this case too, a safe and rule-compliant path would be to submit a formal request to the competent authority outlining the scope of the article. If permitted, Meera should ensure the tone remains neutral and that no internal departmental information or policy critique is included

Government of India. (1961). The Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961. Retrieved from https://legislative.gov.in Government of India. (1964). Central Civil Services (Conduct) Rules, 1964. Ministry of Personnel, Public Grievances and Pensions, Department of Personnel and Training. Retrieved from https://dopt.gov.in

Government of India. (1986). The Child Labour (Prohibition and Regulation) Act, 1986. Ministry of Labour and Employment. Retrieved from https://labour.gov.in

Ministry of Personnel, Public Grievances and Pensions. (2011). Office Memorandum No. 11013/3/2011-Estt.A, Clarification on media interaction by government employees. Retrieved from https://dopt.gov.in

Ministry of Personnel, Public Grievances and Pensions. (2014). Office Memorandum No. 11013/2/2014-Estt.(A-III), Guidelines on Prevention of Sexual Harassment. Retrieved from https://dopt.gov.in