VIGILANCE MANUAL VOLUME III - AP Online

DECISION - 203
473
The High Court turned down the contention of the respondent
that the order of exoneration is not an order under the Classification,
Control and Appeal Rules and that it is an order under the plenary
power which the appointing authority has over a Government servant
and that it is only an order holding charges to be proved that can be
called to be an order under the Rules. The High Court held that if a
disciplinary proceeding is commenced with respect to an accusation
and that disciplinary proceeding has reached the stage when an
inquiry has been completed that disciplinary proceedings must end
either in the imposition of a punishment or in exoneration. The High
Court held that any order including that of exoneration is an order
passed under the C.C.A. Rules. The High Court also held that a
higher authority is competent to review and set aside an order of
exoneration just as an order holding guilty.
The High Court observed that the only ground put forth for
reviewing the earlier order was that if the President was to apply a
different test for evaluating the evidence, he would arrive at a
conclusion opposite to that which he had taken earlier. Rule 29 of
the Central Civil Services (CCA) Rules, 1965 (before its amendment
on 6-8-1981) uses the word ‘review’ but it is well understood that this
word is used in the sense of revision or a reconsideration, but not
necessarily by the very authority which passed the said order. In the
absence of a provision in rule 29, it is not permissible to accept the
contention that the power to review its own order is either specifically
provided for or should be impliedly read into rule 29. Rule 29 excludes the
power to review its own order by the authorities concerned and this power
of review is really in the nature of a revision power to revise by an authority
higher than the authority whose order is sought to be reviewed. It does
not cover the case of authority reviewing its own earlier order. The High
Court accordingly held that rule 29 of the Central Civil Services (CCA)
Rules, 1965 did not permit the President to review his earlier order.