Doctrine of Pleasure in major Common law Countries: Interpretation & Correlation
Siddharth Thapliyal1, Poonam Rawat2 

1Siddharth Thapliyal, PhD Research Scholar, Law College Dehradun, Uttaranchal University, Dehradun, Uttarakhand.
2Dr. Poonam Rawat, Professor & Ho D in Law College Dehradun, Uttaranchal University.

Manuscript received on 13 March 2019 | Revised Manuscript received on 18 March 2019 | Manuscript published on 30 July 2019 | PP: 3949-3953 | Volume-8 Issue-2, July 2019 | Retrieval Number: B2846078219/19©BEIESP | DOI: 10.35940/ijrte.B2846.078219
Open Access | Ethics and Policies | Cite | Mendeley | Indexing and Abstracting
© The Authors. Blue Eyes Intelligence Engineering and Sciences Publication (BEIESP). This is an open access article under the CC-BY-NC-ND license (

Abstract: Article 310 of the Indian Constitution provides that civil and defense servants in the country hold the office during the pleasure of the Governor and the President respectively. This law, which finds its origin in England, is present in all common law countries, and in India, is known as the Doctrine of Pleasure. The aim of this study is to create a comparison of the Doctrine of Pleasure in six common law countries, specifically India, USA, Australia, UK, Canada. Secondary data in the form of existing studies, books, and government websites were used for the purpose. The findings of the study indicate that when it comes to protection of civil servants, all the chosen countries are inclined towards the same objectives such as equalization of opportunities, fair treatment and even the power to file a case against the “Crown” with the exception of UK. The fundamental rights of public service employees are safeguarded with the help of these laws.
Key Words: Doctrine of pleasure, Indian Constitution, Article 310, Article 311, Common Law.

Scope of the Article: Perception and Semantic Interpretation