Rule 22 — CCS (CCA) Rules
Original Rule Text
22. Orders against which no appeal lies
Notwithstanding anything contained in this Part, no appeal shall lie against-
any: order made by the President;
(ii) any: order of an interlocutory nature or of the nature of a step-in-aid of the final disposal of a disciplinary proceeding, other than an order of suspension;
(iii) any order passed by an nquriing authority in the course of an inquiry under Rule 14.
What This Means
Rule 22 is a gate-keeping provision that defines the limits of the right to appeal. While Part VII of the CCS (CCA) Rules creates broad appeal rights, certain categories of orders are completely excluded from challenge by appeal. Understanding what cannot be appealed is as important as understanding what can.
The three excluded categories are: first, any order made by the President himself — since the President is the apex disciplinary authority under these rules, there is no higher authority to hear an appeal; second, interlocutory or step-in-aid orders during a disciplinary proceeding (such as summons to a witness, framing of charges, or directions about the mode of inquiry) — unless the order is one of suspension, which is specifically saved from this exclusion; and third, any order made by an Inquiring Authority in the course of an inquiry under Rule 14 — such as procedural rulings during the inquiry itself.
The rationale behind these exclusions is sound judicial administration. If every procedural step during an inquiry were appealable, proceedings would be paralysed. Only the final outcome — the penalty — and specific enumerated intermediate orders (primarily suspension) can be challenged by appeal.
This explanation was generated with AI assistance for educational purposes. Always refer to the official gazette notification for authoritative text.
Key Points
- 1No appeal lies against any order made by the President of India.
- 2Interlocutory orders during a disciplinary proceeding — orders that are steps toward the final disposal — cannot be appealed.
- 3Orders made by the Inquiring Authority during the course of a Rule 14 inquiry are not appealable.
- 4Orders of suspension are a critical exception: even though they are interlocutory in nature, suspension orders CAN be appealed.
- 5The three exclusions apply 'notwithstanding anything in this Part' — meaning they override any general appeal rights created elsewhere in Part VII.
- 6These exclusions do not bar other remedies (revision, review, or judicial challenge in a court/tribunal).
Practical Example
Shri Deepak Menon, an Upper Division Clerk, was facing a departmental inquiry. During the inquiry, the Inquiring Authority made an order refusing to allow Deepak to bring his own counsel. Deepak believed this was unfair and wanted to appeal. His union representative informed him that under Rule 22(iii), orders passed by the Inquiring Authority during the course of the Rule 14 inquiry cannot be appealed. His remedy was to raise this objection before the Inquiring Authority itself and, if overruled, to challenge the final penalty order in appeal on the ground that this procedural violation caused a failure of justice.
Separately, when Deepak was placed under suspension earlier in the process, his colleague Rajan challenged the suspension by way of an appeal under Rule 23(i) — and this was correctly entertained because Rule 22 specifically saves suspension orders from the bar on interlocutory appeals.
This explanation was generated with AI assistance for educational purposes. Always refer to the official gazette notification for authoritative text.
Frequently Asked Questions
▼
▼
▼
This explanation was generated with AI assistance for educational purposes. Always refer to the official gazette notification for authoritative text.