Rule 7 of CCS (Conduct) Rules, 1964: Demonstrations and Strikes
Updated: 14 September 2026Rule 7 governs participation by Central Government servants in certain demonstrations and prohibits strikes, coercion and physical duress connected with service matters. The rule should be read together with Government instructions and the settled judicial position on strikes by Government employees.
Contents
Text of Rule 7
No Government servant shall -
(i) engage himself or participate in any demonstration which is prejudicial to the interests of the sovereignty and integrity of India, the security of the State, friendly relations with foreign States, public order, decency or morality, or which involves contempt of court, defamation or incitement to an offence; or
(ii) resort to or in any way abet any form of strike or coercion or physical duress in connection with any matter pertaining to his service or the service of any other Government servant.
Meaning and scope of Rule 7
Rule 7 contains two distinct restrictions. Clause (i) deals with participation in a demonstration having one or more of the prejudicial features expressly listed in the rule. Clause (ii) is directed at service-related industrial or coercive action and prohibits resorting to, or abetting, any form of strike, coercion or physical duress.
The rule therefore should not be read as though both clauses use the same test. For demonstrations, the language of clause (i) identifies specific prohibited characteristics. For strikes, clause (ii) uses a direct prohibition where the action concerns the service of the employee or another Government servant.
What may amount to a strike?
Government instructions issued under the conduct framework have treated a strike broadly as concerted refusal to work, stoppage of work or slowing down of work. Illustrative forms have included mass absence without permission, refusal of essential overtime in appropriate circumstances, go-slow, sit-down, pen-down, stay-in, token or sympathetic action, and similar collective conduct that causes or is likely to cause cessation or substantial retardation of work.
| Type of conduct | Rule 7 relevance |
|---|---|
| Concerted refusal or stoppage of work | May amount to a strike under clause (ii). |
| Mass absence without permission | May be treated as strike-related conduct and may also involve unauthorized absence. |
| Go-slow, pen-down, sit-down or stay-in action | Government instructions have treated such concerted methods as forms of strike in appropriate cases. |
| Coercion or physical duress in a service matter | Expressly prohibited by clause (ii). |
Whether particular conduct constitutes a strike or abetment depends on the facts, the applicable Government instructions, the employee's conduct and the surrounding service circumstances.
Demonstrations under Rule 7(i)
Clause (i) prohibits a Government servant from engaging in or participating in a demonstration when the demonstration is prejudicial to the sovereignty and integrity of India, security of the State, friendly relations with foreign States, public order, decency or morality, or when it involves contempt of court, defamation or incitement to an offence.
The text is therefore narrower than a general prohibition on every possible demonstration. At the same time, participation in political activity, use of Government premises, conduct affecting official duties and other forms of employee action may attract separate rules or departmental instructions.
Possible service consequences of prohibited action
A violation of Rule 7 can expose a Government servant to disciplinary action under the applicable service rules. Unauthorized absence connected with strike action may also carry pay and service consequences under the Fundamental Rules and relevant Government instructions, depending on the facts and the category of employee.
Recent official circulars continue to reiterate that Government servants should not participate in or abet prohibited demonstrations or strikes and that unauthorized absence may attract action in addition to disciplinary proceedings.
Judicial position on the right to strike
T.K. Rangarajan v. Government of Tamil Nadu
The Supreme Court held that Government employees do not have a fundamental, statutory or equitable right to go on strike. The decision is frequently cited in Government instructions dealing with strike action by public servants.
The constitutional freedom to form associations does not, by itself, create a guaranteed right to strike. Government employees seeking redress of service grievances are expected to use the remedies and grievance mechanisms available under the applicable service framework.
Frequently asked questions
Does Rule 7 prohibit every demonstration by a Government servant?
No. Clause (i) is worded to prohibit demonstrations having the prejudicial characteristics listed in the rule. However, other conduct rules and official instructions may independently regulate particular demonstrations, political activity, office-premises activity or absence from duty.
Can a Central Government employee participate in a strike concerning service conditions?
Rule 7(ii) prohibits a Government servant from resorting to or abetting any form of strike in connection with his or her service or the service of another Government servant.
Can mass casual leave be treated as a strike?
Government instructions have treated concerted mass absence without permission as one of the forms that may fall within the concept of strike. The legal effect in an individual case depends on the facts and applicable service instructions.
Can disciplinary action follow a breach of Rule 7?
Yes. A breach may constitute misconduct and may lead to disciplinary proceedings in accordance with the applicable rules and principles of natural justice.
Related CCS Conduct Rules
For connected restrictions, also see Rule 5 - Taking part in politics and elections, Rule 6 - Joining of associations, Rule 8 - Connection with press or other media and Rule 9 - Criticism of Government.