#CCS (CCA) Rules 1965

The Andhra Pradesh High Court ruled that orders rejecting interim relief in service matters must provide reasons, as non-speaking orders violate natural justice. The court set aside a Central Administrative Tribunal order, reinforcing that disciplinary proceedings under CCS (CCA) Rules, 1965, require reasoned decisions to ensure fairness and transparency for government employees.

CAT Kolkata ruled that disciplinary proceedings under CCS (CCA) Rules cannot extend to alleged irregularities in external examinations, as these fall outside departmental jurisdiction. The tribunal quashed a major penalty charge sheet against a government employee for purportedly irregular candidature in the Bihar School Examination, reinforcing the boundaries of natural justice in service law.

Uttarakhand High Court rules that suspending a government servant indefinitely without concluding disciplinary proceedings violates principles of natural justice under CCS (CCA) Rules, 1965. The court quashed a five-year-old suspension order, directed fresh posting, and mandated expeditious completion of the enquiry, reinforcing procedural fairness in service law.

Gauhati High Court mandates fresh disciplinary proceedings under Article 311(2)(a) and CCS (CCA) Rules when an appellate court alters the conviction. The ruling underscores proportionality in penalties and the right to a reasoned order, directing authorities to pass a fresh decision within three months.