On 1 October 2026 the Union Public Service Commission turns a hundred. The first Public Service Commission in India was set up on 1 October 1926, and everything that followed — the Federal Public Service Commission, the UPSC, every State PSC — grew out of it. For anyone preparing for a government job, this is the body at the other end of the application form, so it is worth understanding rather than memorising.
And there is one question that organises the entire chapter: is this provision protecting the Commission, or limiting it? Every article from 315 to 323 does one or the other, and once you sort them into those two piles the answer to almost any question falls out. This is the seventh capsule in our polity depth series, going a level below the Constitution capsule, for SSC CGL and CHSL, RRB NTPC, State PSC, banking general awareness and UPSC Prelims.
A Hundred Years in One Table
| When | What happened |
|---|---|
| 1919 | The Government of India Act, 1919 made provision for a Public Service Commission. Nothing was actually set up |
| 1924 | The Lee Commission, chaired by Lord Lee of Fareham, recommended that one be established without further delay |
| 1 October 1926 | The Public Service Commission came into being, with Sir Ross Barker as its first Chairman. Its work at first was little more than the Indian Civil Service examination |
| 1935 | The Government of India Act, 1935 reorganised it as the Federal Public Service Commission and added advisory work on promotions and discipline. The same Act provided for Provincial Public Service Commissions |
| 26 January 1950 | The Constitution renamed it the Union Public Service Commission and gave it constitutional status under Article 315 |
Note the word ‘constitutional’, because it is a term of art. A constitutional body is created by the Constitution itself and can only be abolished or reshaped by amending it. A statutory body — the Staff Selection Commission, for instance — is created by an executive order or an Act and can be changed the same way. The UPSC is constitutional; the SSC is not. That single distinction is asked more often than any other fact in this chapter.
The Hinge: Protecting, or Limiting?
Sort the articles into two piles and the design becomes obvious.
| Protecting the Commission | Limiting the Commission |
|---|---|
| 316 — a fixed term, and half the members must be career government servants | 320 — its advice is purely advisory |
| 317 — removal only by the President, and only after the Supreme Court says so | 320(3) proviso — the government may exclude matters from consultation altogether |
| 318 — conditions of service cannot be varied to a member’s disadvantage | 321 — extra functions only if a legislature grants them |
| 319 — no employment afterwards, so nobody can be rewarded for obliging | Reservation matters are outside its consultation |
| 322 — expenses charged on the Consolidated Fund, so they are not voted on annually |
Put the two columns together and you get the character of the institution: maximum independence, minimum power. The UPSC is protected almost exactly like a judge, and obeyed almost exactly like a consultant. That tension is not an accident; it is the design. Its job is to give honest advice on appointments, and a body that could be punished for honest advice would stop giving it — but a body that could compel appointments would be running the executive.
Article 323 is where the two columns meet, and we come to it at the end.
Articles 315 to 323, One Line Each
| Article | What it does |
|---|---|
| 315 | There shall be a Public Service Commission for the Union and one for each State. Two or more States may ask Parliament, by resolutions of their legislatures, to create a Joint State Public Service Commission |
| 316 | Appointment and term. Members of the UPSC and of a Joint SPSC are appointed by the President; members of a State PSC by the Governor |
| 317 | Removal and suspension — see below, because this is the article that surprises people |
| 318 | Power to make regulations on the number of members and their conditions of service |
| 319 | Prohibition on holding office afterwards — the one-way door |
| 320 | Functions — conducting examinations and being consulted |
| 321 | Parliament or a State legislature may extend its functions |
| 322 | Expenses charged on the Consolidated Fund of India or of the State |
| 323 | Annual report, and the memorandum that must go with it |
Composition and Term
The Constitution does not say how many members there shall be. Article 316 leaves the number to the President for the UPSC and to the Governor for a State PSC. In practice the UPSC has a Chairman and around nine or ten members.
| UPSC and Joint State PSC | State PSC | |
|---|---|---|
| Appointed by | The President | The Governor |
| Term | 6 years or age 65, whichever is earlier | 6 years or age 62, whichever is earlier |
| Qualification | At least half the members must be people who have held office for 10 years or more under the Government of India or of a State | The same rule applies |
The 62-versus-65 split is a favourite question, and there is a way to keep it straight: the Union body gets the higher age, as it does almost everywhere in the Constitution — Supreme Court 65 against High Court 62 is the same pattern, as our Supreme Court and High Courts capsule sets out.
And notice the ten-year rule. Half the Commission must be career civil servants and half need not be. The Constitution is deliberately mixing insiders who know how the service works with outsiders who are not part of it. A commission entirely of serving officers would be judging its own colleagues; one entirely of outsiders would not know what it was looking at.
Removal: The Part That Surprises People
Article 317. Read this carefully, because the obvious answer is wrong.
- A Chairman or member of any Public Service Commission — Union or State — can be removed only by the President.
- On the ground of misbehaviour, the President must first refer the matter to the Supreme Court. The Commission’s member can be removed only if the Court, after an inquiry, reports that he ought to be removed. That advice is binding on the President.
- There are also three grounds needing no reference: if the person is adjudged insolvent, engages in paid employment outside the duties of the office, or is unfit by reason of infirmity of mind or body.
- During a Supreme Court inquiry the President may suspend the member.
Here is the part worth marking. A member of a State Public Service Commission is appointed by the Governor — but can be removed only by the President. The State government that appoints cannot dismiss.
Why the Constitution does this is the whole point. The body a State PSC most often has to say no to is the State government. If that government could also sack its members, the refusal would be worthless. So the power to remove is deliberately lifted out of the State and placed with the Union, and even then it is placed behind a Supreme Court inquiry. It is one of the very few places in the Constitution where a State appointment is entirely outside State control.
Compare this with the Election Commission. There, as our Election Commission capsule shows, only the Chief Election Commissioner has judge-like protection and the other two can go on his recommendation. Here every member of every Public Service Commission in the country has it. Ironically, the body with the least power has the broadest protection.
Article 319: The One-Way Door
This is the most examinable table in the chapter, and there is a rule that generates all of it.
After serving, you may move up or sideways. You may never move back into the executive.
| Who they were | What they may hold afterwards |
|---|---|
| Chairman of the UPSC | Nothing. Ineligible for any further employment under the Government of India or of any State |
| Member of the UPSC | Chairman of the UPSC, or Chairman of a State PSC. Nothing else |
| Chairman of a State PSC | Chairman or member of the UPSC, or Chairman of another State PSC. Nothing else |
| Member of a State PSC | Chairman or member of the UPSC, or Chairman of that or any other State PSC. Nothing else |
Work down the table and the logic is visible. The UPSC Chairman is at the top of the ladder, so there is nowhere further up and the door simply shuts. Everyone else may climb, but nobody at any level may take an ordinary government post afterwards.
And now ask why. A Commission recommends people for jobs. If its own members could be given jobs afterwards, every recommendation would carry a suspicion. Removing the reward removes the motive. It is the same instinct as a retired Supreme Court judge being barred from practising before any court in India — independence is protected by making it pointless to please anyone.
What the Commission Actually Does
Article 320. Two kinds of work, and they are not equally strong.
| Kind of work | Detail |
|---|---|
| It conducts | Examinations for appointment to the services of the Union — the Civil Services Examination, the Engineering Services Examination, CDS, NDA, CAPF, the Combined Medical Services Examination and others. It also conducts interviews and recommends names |
| It is consulted on | Methods of recruitment; principles for appointments, promotions and transfers; disciplinary matters affecting a civil servant; claims for the reimbursement of legal costs incurred defending official acts; and claims for a pension for injuries sustained in service |
But the consultation is advisory. The government may take the advice or ignore it. There is no article anywhere that makes UPSC advice binding.
And some things it is not consulted on at all:
- Reservations in appointments for backward classes.
- Claims of Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes to be considered in making appointments.
- Any posts, services or matters the President excludes by regulations under the proviso to Article 320(3). Those regulations must be laid before Parliament.
So the second column of the hinge table is real and it has teeth. The executive can narrow what the Commission is even asked about.
Article 323: Accountability by Embarrassment
If the advice is not binding, what stops a government simply ignoring it every time? Article 323, and it works in an unusual way.
- The UPSC presents an annual report to the President; a State PSC to the Governor.
- The report is then laid before Parliament, or before the State legislature.
- And it must be accompanied by a memorandum setting out every case in which the Commission’s advice was not accepted, and the reasons for not accepting it.
That is the whole enforcement mechanism. The government is free to reject the advice; it is not free to reject it quietly. Every rejection must be written down and placed before a legislature.
Recognise the shape. It is the same device as the Model Code of Conduct in our Election Commission capsule — an institution with no power to compel, relying on the fact that nobody wants to explain themselves in public. Across Indian constitutional design, this is how weak-on-paper institutions actually get obeyed.
Which Body Recruits for What
Directly useful if you are preparing for any of these, and it is asked as a straight matching question.
| Body | Status | Recruits for |
|---|---|---|
| UPSC | Constitutional | All India Services (IAS, IPS, IFoS) and Group A and some Group B central civil services; defence entries such as NDA and CDS |
| State PSC | Constitutional | State civil services — the Deputy Collector, DSP and equivalent posts of that State |
| SSC — Staff Selection Commission | Not constitutional | Mainly Group B non-gazetted and Group C posts in ministries and departments — CGL, CHSL, MTS, GD Constable |
| RRB — Railway Recruitment Boards | Not constitutional | Railway posts — NTPC, ALP, JE, Group D |
| IBPS and the SBI’s own process | Not constitutional | Public sector bank clerical and officer posts |
Read the status column down. Only the two Public Service Commissions are constitutional bodies. Everything else on that list exists because the government decided it should, and could be reorganised without touching the Constitution.
Traps Worth Marking
- A State PSC member is appointed by the Governor and removed only by the President.
- UPSC advice is not binding — but a Supreme Court report under Article 317 is.
- UPSC members retire at 65, State PSC members at 62.
- Half the members must have 10 years of government service — not all of them.
- A UPSC Chairman may hold no further office at all. A UPSC member may still become a Chairman.
- The Constitution fixes no number of members; the President or Governor does.
- The UPSC is a constitutional body; the SSC is not.
- The UPSC is not consulted on reservation matters.
- A Joint State PSC is created by Parliament, on a resolution of the State legislatures concerned — not by the States acting alone.
Five Practice Questions
Q1. A member of a State Public Service Commission can be removed by…
(a) the Governor who appointed him (b) the State Legislative Assembly (c) the President (d) the Chief Minister
Answer: (c) the President Appointment is by the Governor but removal is by the President alone, and on the ground of misbehaviour only after a Supreme Court inquiry. The State that appoints cannot dismiss.
Q2. Which article deals with the prohibition on a Public Service Commission member holding office afterwards?
(a) Article 316 (b) Article 317 (c) Article 319 (d) Article 320
Answer: (c) Article 319 316 is appointment and term, 317 is removal, and 320 is functions. 319 is the one that shuts the door on further employment.
Q3. The age of retirement for a member of the Union Public Service Commission is…
(a) 60 years (b) 62 years (c) 65 years (d) 70 years
Answer: (c) 65 years The State PSC equivalent is 62, and in each case a six-year term applies if it expires first. The Union body gets the higher age, as it usually does.
Q4. The annual report of the UPSC is laid before Parliament together with…
(a) a list of candidates recommended that year (b) a memorandum explaining every case where its advice was not accepted (c) the Comptroller and Auditor General’s audit of the Commission (d) a resolution approving the report
Answer: (b) a memorandum explaining every case where its advice was not accepted That memorandum is the entire enforcement mechanism. The advice cannot be made binding, so the Constitution instead makes every rejection a matter of record before a legislature.
Q5. The first Public Service Commission in India was set up in 1926 on the recommendation of…
(a) the Hunter Commission (b) the Simon Commission (c) the Lee Commission (d) the Sapru Committee
Answer: (c) the Lee Commission Chaired by Lord Lee of Fareham in 1924. The Government of India Act, 1919 had already provided for such a body; the Lee Commission pressed for it actually to be created, and it was, on 1 October 1926.
Ten more questions on this and today’s Current Affairs explainer are waiting on our Test Your Knowledge page, with a free PDF.
Sources: the Constitution of India, Part XIV, Articles 315 to 323; the Government of India Acts of 1919 and 1935; and published accounts of the Lee Commission of 1924 and of the Commission’s own institutional history. The number of members and the identity of the Chairman change from time to time and should be rechecked before an examination.
