Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

Integrated with over 4 crore judgments and laws — designed for legal practitioners, researchers, students and institutions

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 0, Cited by 0] [Entire Act]

Union of India - Section

Section 27 in Central Civil Services (Classification, Control & Appeal) Rules, 1965

27. Consideration of appeal.

(1)In the case of an appeal against an order of suspension, the appellate authority shall consider whether in the light of the provisions of rule 10 and having regard to the circumstances of the case, the order of suspension is justified or not and confirm or revoke the order accordingly.
(2)In the case of an appeal against an order imposing any of the penalties specified in rule 11 or enhancing any penalty imposed under the said rules, the appellate authority shall consider-
(a)whether the procedure laid down in these rules have been complied with and if not, whether such non-compliance has resulted in the violation of any provisions of the Constitution of India or in the failure of justice;
(b)whether the findings of the disciplinary authority are warranted by the evidence on the record; and
(c)whether the penalty or the enhanced penalty imposed is adequate, inadequate or severe;
and pass orders-
(i)confirming, enhancing, reducing, or setting aside the penalty; or
(ii)remitting the case to the authority which imposed or enhanced the penalty or to any other authority with such direction as it may deem fit in the circumstances of the case :
provided that-
(i)The Commission shall be consulted in all cases where such consultation is necessary [and the Government servant has been given an opportunity of representing against the advice of the Commission] [Added by Notification No. G.S.R. 769(E), dated 31.10.2014];
[within the time limit specified in clause (b) of the sub-rule (3) of rule 15] [Inserted by Notification No. G.S.R. 548(E), dated 2.6.2017.]
(ii)If such enhanced penalty which the appellate authority proposes to impose is one of the penalties specified in clauses (v) to (ix) of rule 11 and in inquiry under rule 14 has not already been held in the case, the appellate authority shall, subject to the provisions of rule 19, itself hold such inquiry or direct that such inquiry be held in accordance with the provisions of rule 14 and thereafter, on a consideration of the proceedings of such inquiry and make such orders as it may deem fit:
(i)if the enhanced penalty which the appellate authority proposes to impose is one of the penalties specified in clauses (v) to (ix) of rule 11 and an enquiry under rule 14 has been held in the case, the appellate authority shall make such orders as it may deem fit after the appellant has been given a reasonable opportunity of making a representation against the proposed penalty; and
(ii)no order imposing an enhanced penalty shall be made in any other case unless the appellant has been given a reasonable opportunity, as far as may be, in accordance with the provisions of rule 16, of making a representation against such enhanced penalty.
(3)In an appeal against any other order specified in rule 23, the appellate authority shall consider all the circumstances of the case and make such orders as it may deem just and equitable.
Government of India's orders/decisions6
Government of India's Instructions :(1) Time-limit for the disposal of appeals :-The following suggestions have been examined in order to achieve quicker disposal of appeals :-(a) the need for and the feasibility of appointing additional appellate authorities wherever the present workload of appellate authorities is unduly heavy; and(b) the prescribing of a procedure by which the position regarding pending appeals could be reviewed by higher authorities at periodical intervals so as to take suitable and timely remedial action.2. The two suggestions mentioned in para 1 have been examined. Although the appellate authorities are expected to give a high priority to the disposal of appeals, there might be cases in which the hands of the appellate authority are too full and it may not be able to devote the time and attention required for the disposal of appeals within a short period. In such case the appellate authority can be relieved of his normal work to such an extent as would be necessary to enable him to devote the required time and attention to the disposal of appeals pending before him by redistribution of that work amongst other officers. If, however, the number of appeals received or pending with any particular appellate authority is very large, the appellate work itself could be redistributed as far as possible among a number of officers of equivalent rank and in any case not below the rank of the appellate authority through a general order issued in exercise of the powers under Rule 24 of the CCS (CCA) Rules.3. As regards prescribing procedure for review of the position regarding pending appeals, it has been decided that, apart from the provisions laid down in the Manual of Office Procedure whereby cases pending disposal for over a month are reviewed by the appropriate higher authorities, a separate detailed statement of appeals pending disposal for over a month should be submitted by the appellate authority to the next higher authority indicating particularly the reasons on account of which the appeals could not be disposed of within a month and the further appeals could not be disposed of within a month and the further time likely to be taken for disposal of each such appeal, along-with the reasons therefor. This would enable the appropriate higher authority to go into the reasons for the delay in the disposal of appeals pending for more than a month, and take remedial steps wherever necessary to have the pending appeals disposed of without further delay. In cases where the appellate authority is the President under Rule 24 of the CCS (CCA) Rules, 1965, the aforesaid statement should be submitted to the Secretary of the Ministry/Department concerned for similar scrutiny.(Cabinet Sectt. (Department of Personnel), OM No. 39/42/70-Ests.(A) dated the 15th May, 1971).(2) Personal hearing at the discretion of appellate authority in major penalty cases :-The Committee of the National Council (JCM) set up to review the CCS (CCA) Rules, 1965 has recommended that provision may be made for personal hearing by the Appellate authority of the employee concerned if the appeal is against a major penalty.2. The above recommendation has been considered in all its aspects. Rule 27 of the CCS (CCA) Rules, 1965 does not specifically provide for the grant of a personal hearing by the appellate authority to the Government servant before deciding the appeal preferred by him against a penalty imposed on him. The principle of right to personal hearing applicable to a judicial trial or proceeding even at the appellate stage is not applicable to departmental inquiries, in which a decision by the appellate authority can generally be taken on the basis of the records before it. However, a personal hearing of the appellant by the appellate authority at times will afford the former an opportunity to present his case more effectively and thereby facilitate the appellate authority in deciding the appeal quickly and in a just and equitable manner. As Rule 27 of the CCA Rules does not preclude the grant of personal hearing in suitable cases, it has been decided that where the appeal is against an order imposing a major penalty and the appellant makes a specific request for a personal hearing the appellate authority may after considering all relevant circumstances of the case, allow the appellant, as its discretion, the personal hearing.[G.I., Deptt. of Personnel & Trg. OM No. 11012/20/85-Estt.(A) dated 28th October, 1985].The Staff side in the National Council (JCM) have requested that the Government servants against whom a major penalty has been imposed should be allowed the services of defence assistant to present their case before the competent authority at appeal/revision stage.(2A)The proposal was discussed in the meeting of the National Council (JCM) on 31.01.1991 and it has been decided that in all those cases where a personal hearing is allowed by the appellate authority in terms of OM dated 28.10.85, referred to above, the Government servant may be allowed to take the assistance of a defence assistant also, if a request is made to that effect.[G.I.Deptt. of Personnel & Trg. OM No. 11012/2/91-Estt.(A) dated 23.04.91]