Dismissal and removal from service

Dismissal and removal are the gravest penalties under the CCS (CCA) Rules 1965. Both forfeit pension; dismissal also bars future government employment.

Updated 16 July 2026 · Reviewed by Salary-Calculator.in

Dismissal and removal from service are the two gravest penalties the CCS (Classification, Control and Appeal) Rules, 1965 allow the government to impose on a civil servant. Both are major penalties under Rule 11, both terminate the service as a punishment for proven misconduct, and both forfeit the pension and gratuity the employee earned across a career. They sit at the top of the ladder of disciplinary penalties, above even compulsory retirement, and they are reserved for the most serious cases.

The two are close cousins, distinguished by a single but important consequence. Dismissal from service, under Rule 11(ix), ordinarily disqualifies the person from any future employment under the government. Removal from service, under Rule 11(viii), ends the service and forfeits the pension in exactly the same way, but it does not carry that bar, so a removed employee is not shut out of a fresh government post later. For the pension, which is the concern of this site, the two are identical: both forfeit it.

Because they forfeit the pension, dismissal and removal are the mirror image of compulsory retirement , the third penalty that ends the service. Compulsory retirement preserves the pension, reduced at most to two-thirds; dismissal and removal wipe it out, leaving only a discretionary compassionate allowance of up to two-thirds in a deserving case. The choice among the three penalties therefore decides the whole of an employee’s retirement, which is why it is made only after the full safeguards of a disciplinary inquiry.

This article sets out both penalties: what they are and how they differ, the corruption cases in which they are mandatory, the inquiry and the Article 311 protections that must precede them, the forfeiture of pension and gratuity and the compassionate-allowance relief, what survives the penalty (the provident fund) and what does not (the gratuity), the family-pension position, the distinction from compulsory retirement and from a simple discharge, and the route to challenge the order and win reinstatement.

Two penalties at the top of the ladder

Rule 11 of the CCS (CCA) Rules lists the penalties a civil servant can face, and dismissal and removal are the last two and the heaviest. Both are major penalties, which means each can be imposed only after the full inquiry procedure in Rule 14, never by a summary order. Both end the service, and both are distinguished from compulsory retirement, the mildest of the three service-ending penalties, by their effect on the pension.

The clauses that create them are precise about the one point on which they differ. Removal from service, in the words of Rule 11(viii), “shall not be a disqualification for future employment under the Government”. Dismissal from service, in the words of Rule 11(ix), “shall ordinarily be a disqualification for future employment under the Government”. So the law itself draws the line: removal ends this employment, dismissal ends this employment and ordinarily blocks the next. In every other respect, including the forfeiture of pension, the two operate alike.

When removal or dismissal must be imposed

For most misconduct, the choice of penalty is a matter of judgement for the disciplinary authority, weighing the gravity of the proven charge. But Rule 11 removes that discretion in two defined corruption cases through a proviso. Where a charge that the government servant possesses assets disproportionate to the known sources of income, or a charge of accepting illegal gratification, that is a bribe, as a motive or reward for doing or forbearing to do an official act, is established, the penalty of removal or dismissal must be imposed. The rule makes the gravest penalties mandatory for proven corruption of these two kinds.

The mandate is not absolute. A further proviso allows that, in an exceptional case and for special reasons which must be recorded in writing, some other penalty may be imposed instead. But the default is set firmly: proven disproportionate assets or proven bribery of the specified kind ordinarily ends the service by removal or dismissal, with the forfeiture of pension that follows. This is one of the strongest anti-corruption levers in the service rules, and it is why a vigilance case that establishes either charge so often ends a career and its pension together. Vigilance cases of this kind additionally engage the Central Vigilance Commission at defined stages.

The inquiry and the Article 311 safeguards

Neither penalty can be imposed without process. Because dismissal, removal, and reduction in rank are exactly the actions that Article 311 of the Constitution protects against, the government must follow the full departmental inquiry under Rule 14 before it can dismiss or remove a civil servant. The employee must be served with a written charge sheet, given a reasonable opportunity to defend, allowed to cross-examine the witnesses against them and to lead a defence, and supplied the inquiry report before the disciplinary authority decides. The order must come from an authority not subordinate to the authority that appointed the employee.

Article 311(2) admits only three narrow exceptions in which the inquiry can be dispensed with: where the dismissal or removal follows a conviction on a criminal charge; where the disciplinary authority records in writing that it is not reasonably practicable to hold an inquiry; and where the President is satisfied that the security of the State makes an inquiry inexpedient. These exceptions are strictly construed, and outside them a dismissal or removal without a proper inquiry is liable to be set aside. The constitutional detail is in the Article 311 article and the procedure in the CCS (CCA) Rules .

The pension consequence: forfeiture under Rule 41

The defining feature of both penalties is forfeiture. Under Rule 41 of the CCS (Pension) Rules, 2021 , a government servant dismissed or removed from service forfeits the pension and gratuity that would otherwise have been payable. Pension is earned by qualifying service , but it is conditional on the service ending honourably, and dismissal or removal breaks that condition and cancels the earned benefit. An employee removed after twenty-five years does not keep a reduced pension for the honest years; the pension is gone.

The single relief is the compassionate allowance. The proviso to Rule 41 lets the competent authority, if the case is deserving of special consideration, sanction a compassionate allowance of not more than two-thirds of the pension or gratuity that would otherwise have been admissible. It is discretionary, not a right, and it is meant to soften the penalty’s effect on an innocent family rather than to reward the employee. Its mechanics, the two-thirds ceiling, the discretion within it, and the Rule 44(5) calculation, are set out in full in the compassionate allowance article. The contrast with compulsory retirement is exact: there, under Rule 40, two-thirds is the guaranteed floor of a pension that survives; here, under Rule 41, two-thirds is the ceiling of an allowance granted against a background of total forfeiture.

What survives the penalty, and what does not

Forfeiture does not sweep away everything the employee has accumulated, and the distinctions are worth stating precisely because they are often misunderstood.

The General Provident Fund balance is not forfeited. The GPF is made up entirely of the employee’s own contributions and the interest on them, so it is the employee’s own money, and it is refunded on dismissal or removal like any other exit from service. Provident-fund deposits are protected from confiscation, so the government cannot appropriate them even to meet a fine or a loss the employee caused. The savings element of the Central Government Employees Group Insurance Scheme is similarly the employee’s own accumulation and is paid out.

The retirement gratuity, by contrast, is forfeited. Unlike the GPF, the gratuity is a terminal benefit paid by the government for past service, and it falls with the pension when the service is ended by dismissal or removal, as the gratuity for central government employees article notes. So the clean line is this: the employee keeps their own money, the provident fund and the insurance savings, but loses the government-funded pension and gratuity, subject only to any compassionate allowance that is sanctioned.

The family pension occupies a middle position. The family-pension rules treat a person drawing a compassionate allowance on par with a pensioner, so where a compassionate allowance was sanctioned and the person was drawing it at death, the family is entitled to a family pension. Where the pension was forfeited outright and no compassionate allowance was granted, that basis for a family pension does not arise. The grant of a compassionate allowance therefore matters not only to the dismissed employee but to the family’s security after them.

Dismissal and removal against compulsory retirement and discharge

Two comparisons complete the picture. The first is with compulsory retirement, the other penalty that ends the service. Compulsory retirement, under Rule 40, does not forfeit the pension; it leaves a compulsory-retirement pension of not less than two-thirds and up to the full amount, as the compulsory retirement article explains. An employee is always materially better off compulsorily retired than removed, and far better off than dismissed, so the disciplinary authority’s choice among the three is decisive for the person’s retirement.

The second comparison is with a simple discharge or termination. A discharge from service , such as the termination of a temporary employee or the discharge of a probationer found unsuitable, is not a penalty at all. It carries no stigma, needs no disciplinary inquiry, and does not forfeit any pension the person may have earned; it is a termination simpliciter on administrative grounds, not a punishment for misconduct. The label matters greatly, because a termination that is in substance a punishment for misconduct, but is dressed up as a simple discharge to avoid the inquiry, can be struck down as a colourable exercise that denies the Article 311 safeguards.

Challenging the order and reinstatement

A dismissal or removal is not final on the day it is passed. Because it is a penalty, it can be appealed to the prescribed appellate authority, which may confirm, reduce, or set aside the penalty, and it can be revised under Rule 29 and reviewed under Rule 29-A. Once the departmental remedies are exhausted, the employee can approach the Central Administrative Tribunal , and thereafter the High Court and the Supreme Court on limited grounds.

Where the order is set aside, the ordinary consequence is reinstatement . The employee is restored to service, and the authority or the court gives directions on the intervening period, including whether it counts as service and how much of the back wages is payable, which depends on the reason the order fell and on whether the employee was gainfully employed in the meantime. A successful challenge therefore restores not only the job but the pension that the forfeiture had cancelled, which is why the correctness of the inquiry and the proportionality of the penalty are so heavily litigated.

Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs)

What is the difference between dismissal and removal from service?

Both are major penalties under Rule 11 of the CCS (CCA) Rules 1965 that end the service and forfeit the pension. The difference is future employment: dismissal from service ordinarily disqualifies the person from any future employment under the government, while removal from service does not carry that bar, so a removed employee can in principle be considered for a fresh government post later.

Do you lose your pension if you are dismissed or removed?

Yes. Both dismissal and removal forfeit the pension and gratuity earned across the career, under Rule 41 of the CCS (Pension) Rules 2021. The only relief is a discretionary compassionate allowance of up to two-thirds of the pension otherwise admissible, which the competent authority may grant in a case deserving special consideration, but which is not a right.

Is the provident fund forfeited on dismissal?

No. The General Provident Fund balance is entirely the employee’s own contributions plus interest, so it is refunded on dismissal or removal and is not forfeited. Provident fund deposits are protected from confiscation even in satisfaction of a fine or a loss caused to the government. What is forfeited is the pension and the government-paid retirement gratuity, not the employee’s own GPF.

Can a dismissed employee's family get a family pension?

It depends on whether a compassionate allowance was sanctioned. The family pension rules treat a person drawing a compassionate allowance on par with a pensioner, so where a compassionate allowance was granted and the person was drawing it at death, the family is entitled to a family pension. Where the pension was forfeited outright with no compassionate allowance, that basis for a family pension does not arise.

When must removal or dismissal be imposed?

Rule 11 carries a proviso that makes these penalties mandatory in defined corruption cases: where a charge of possessing assets disproportionate to known sources of income, or of accepting illegal gratification as a motive or reward for an official act, is established, the penalty of removal or dismissal must be imposed, unless in an exceptional case, for special reasons recorded in writing, another penalty is chosen.

Can dismissal or removal be challenged?

Yes. Because they are penalties, they can be appealed to the prescribed appellate authority, revised, and reviewed under the CCS (CCA) Rules, and then taken to the Central Administrative Tribunal and the courts. If the order is set aside because the inquiry was flawed or the penalty was disproportionate, the employee is reinstated, often with directions on back wages and the treatment of the intervening period.

Is dismissal the same as being discharged or terminated?

No. Dismissal and removal are punishments imposed for proven misconduct after an inquiry. Discharge or termination simpliciter, such as the termination of a temporary employee or a probationer who is found unsuitable, is not a penalty, carries no stigma, and does not forfeit any pension the person may have earned. The label matters, because the safeguards and the consequences are entirely different.

External references

References

Central Civil Services (Classification, Control and Appeal) Rules, 1965, Rule 11(viii) (removal from service, not a disqualification for future employment) and Rule 11(ix) (dismissal from service, ordinarily a disqualification for future employment), with the proviso mandating removal or dismissal where a charge of possession of disproportionate assets or of acceptance of illegal gratification is established.
Central Civil Services (Classification, Control and Appeal) Rules, 1965, Rule 14 (procedure for major penalties), read with Article 311 of the Constitution (safeguards against dismissal, removal, or reduction in rank, and its three exceptions).
Central Civil Services (Pension) Rules, 2021, Rule 41 (forfeiture of pension and gratuity on dismissal or removal, and the proviso empowering a compassionate allowance not exceeding two-thirds), contrasted with Rule 40 (compulsory-retirement pension, not less than two-thirds and up to the full pension).
General Provident Fund (Central Services) Rules, 1960 (final withdrawal of the subscriber’s own balance on quitting service, including on dismissal or removal, and the protection of provident-fund deposits from confiscation).
Central Civil Services (Pension) Rules, 2021, family-pension provisions treating a person in receipt of a compassionate allowance on par with a pensioner for the grant of family pension on death.