This article contrasts the Doctrine of Pleasure, the constitutional hallmark of tenure of public servants vis-à-vis the executive, which obviously is derived from the prerogatives of the British sovereign, under whom the time-servants like ambassadors, royal secretaries and many others may be removed at her sweet will without any need of assigning to that effect, even to the extent that there may not be any assigned reason save to the extent that a statutory or legal restriction will be violated. The Article traces the development of the Doctrine in the USA, the UK as well as in India, and how the curbing of the executive power against the rights of the public servant marked three directions, by statutory reforms, judicial interpretations and constitutional provisions. The subtleness of its approach is recognizable by the way it is applied to secure the efficiency of administration and the rights of the public servant against arbitrariness.
