Article 18 of Indian Constitution: Abolition of Titles

Article 18 of Indian Constitution included under the Fundamental Rights, addresses the elimination of titles. It bars the state from granting any titles with the exception of academic and military distinctions. It also forbids Indian citizens from accepting titles from foreign countries and requires that non-citizens serving in state positions obtain the President's approval before accepting any title or gift from a foreign state. Explore other important Constitutional Articles.

Article 18 of Indian Constitution

Abolition of titles 

1. No title, not being a military or academic distinction, shall be conferred by the State. 
2. No citizen of India shall accept any title from any foreign State. 
3. No person who is not a citizen of India shall, while he holds any office of profit or trust under the State, accept without the consent of the President any title from any foreign State. 
4. No person holding any office of profit or trust under the State shall, without the consent of the President, accept any present, emolument, or office of any kind from or under any foreign State.

Note: “The information provided above has been sourced from the official website, i.e., Indian Code. While the content has been presented here for reference, no modifications have been made to the original laws and orders.”

Abolition of Titles Article 18 of Indian Constitution under Part III is divided into four clauses that collectively prohibit the state from granting titles and citizens from accepting foreign titles. It highlights the constitutional vision of a classless society where privileges are not granted based on birth or external honors but are gained through merit and contribution to society. The prohibition applies to both citizens and non-citizens in specific contexts:

Article 18 (1) of Indian Constitution

Article 18 of Indian Constitution Clause (1) explicitly states that no title other than a military or academic distinction, shall be conferred by the state. This means that honors such as “Sir”, “Lord” or any other titles that signify social hierarchy or nobility are not allowed. However, the Constitution makes exceptions for military and academic distinctions. These exceptions permit the state to honor individuals for exceptional service or achievement in these fields without violating the constitutional mandate against titles.

Article 18 (2) of Indian Constitution

Article 18 of Indian Constitution Clause (2) prevents any citizen of India from accepting titles from any foreign state. The intent behind this is to ensure that Indian citizens do not feel obliged or bound to foreign states or interests by virtue of any titles they receive.

Article 18 (3) of Indian Constitution

Article 18 of Indian Constitution Clause (3) adds an additional layer of restriction by stating that a non-citizen holding an office of profit or trust under the state must not accept any foreign title, emolument, or office without the consent of the President. Article 18 (3) of Constitution aims to ensure that individuals holding positions of authority are not influenced by foreign interests.

Article 18 (4) of Indian Constitution

Article 18 of Indian Constitution Clause (4) reinforces the principles provided in Clauses (2) and (3) highlighting the necessity for consent from the President before any non-citizen in the state’s service can accept foreign titles or honors. The term military distinction and academic distinction have been interpreted widely. Military distinction includes honors and awards conferred by the armed forces of India, while academic distinction encompasses awards and honors conferred by universities, academic institutions, and professional bodies.

Download 5 Key take aways on Article 18 of Indian Constitution Free PDF

Article 18 plays an important role in upholding the democratic ethos of India by abolishing titles of nobility and preventing the creation of a privileged class. At the same time, it allows recognition of individual merit in professional, academic and national service domains.

• Promotes Equality:
  • Abolishes hereditary titles to ensure no citizen is placed above others by virtue of birth or favour.
  • Reinforces the principle of equality enshrined in the Constitution.
• Permits Professional Recognition:
  • Allows titles such as Major, Doctor, Professor, etc., which reflect achievement and expertise.
  • These are merit-based and not associated with any social or political superiority.
• Validates National Awards:
  • Awards like Bharat Ratna and Padma Awards recognize excellence without creating a titled class.
  • Encourages national pride and acknowledges service in arts, science, literature, and public affairs.

Article 18 of Indian Constitution Titles and Honours

Article 18 of Indian Constitution prohibits the state from conferring titles of nobility but allows professional and merit-based distinctions. Military and academic titles along with certain national awards are valid as they reflect individual excellence rather than hereditary privilege.

• Military Titles:
  • Titles such as Major, Captain, and General are permitted.
  • These indicate rank and merit in armed services.
• Academic Titles:
  • Titles like Professor and Doctor are allowed.
  • They reflect academic and professional achievement.
• National Awards:
  • Bharat Ratna and Padma awards are constitutionally valid.
  • They honour excellence in public service, arts, science, and other fields.
  • These awards do not confer nobility or titles of social rank.
• Bharat Ratna:
  • Established in 1954 as India’s highest civilian honour.
  • Awarded for exceptional service in fields like literature, science, public service.
  • Symbolizes extraordinary national contribution.
• Padma Awards:
  • Padma Vibhushan: For exceptional and distinguished service.
  • Padma Bhushan: For distinguished service of high order.
  • Padma Shri: For distinguished service in any field.
  • Designed to promote public motivation and national pride.

Article 18 of Indian Constitution Judicial Pronouncements

The judiciary has clarified the scope and limitations of Article 18 of Indian Constitution in several landmark cases, especially concerning national honours and professional recognitions. The following landmark judgements have ensured that the constitutional spirit of equality is upheld while allowing merit-based distinctions.

Balaji Raghavan Case

In Balaji Raghavan vs Union of India, 1995, the Supreme Court of India provided an important interpretation regarding the scope and applicability of Article 18 of Indian Constitution. In this case, a petition was filed challenging the constitutionality of national awards such as the Bharat Ratna, Padma Vibhushan, Padma Bhushan, and Padma Shri. It was argued that these awards should be considered as titles under Article 18 of the Constitution. It was further contended that these awards were misappropriated and conferred on undeserving individuals and hence hindering the intended purpose.

In this case, Balaji Raghavan filed a writ of mandamus in the High Court under Article 226 of the Indian Constitution, praying an order to prevent the Government of India from granting these awards. The question whether these awards constituted titles under Article 18 (1) of Indian Constitution. The matter was brought before the Supreme Court to decide the question in hand.

The Supreme Court in Balaji Raghavan vs Union of India held that the national awards such as the Bharat Ratna and Padma awards do not fall within the purview of titles forbidden by Article 18 of the Constitution. The Supreme Court also highlighted that the principle of equality does not require denying recognition to individuals who have rendered outstanding service to the nation. It was also stated that the Article 51A (j) of Indian Constitution encourages citizens to strive for excellence in various fields which aligns with the purpose of these awards.

The Supreme Court recommended that a high-level commission should be established by the Prime Minister in consultation with the President to prevent misappropriation and to ensure that only deserving individuals are honored with these awards.

Indira Jaising vs Supreme Court of India (2017)

In Indira Jaising vs Supreme Court of India, the practice of designation as Senior Advocates was challenged. It was argued that this practice was in violation of Article 14 and Article 18 of the Constitution of India. In this case, the Supreme Court held that designation of Senior Advocates is not a conferral of title but a recognition of merit and experience, and hence, does not infringes Articles 14 & 18 of the Constitution of India.

Conclusion

Article 18 of Indian Constitution is an important provision that upholds the principle of equality by prohibiting the conferment and acceptance of titles. It reflects the constitutional intent to prevent the establishment of any social hierarchies based on titles and reinforces the vision of a classless society.