What is the difference between revision and review under the CCS (CCA) Rules?

Revision under Rule 29 is a suo motu or on-application power exercisable by specified higher authorities to call for and examine records of any inquiry and modify, set aside or confirm the order — with or without new material. Review under Rule 29-A is exercisable only by the President and only when new material or evidence (which could not be produced or was not available at the time of the original order) has come to notice and has the effect of changing the nature of the case.

Can a Head of Department revise an order passed in appeal by the appellate authority?

Yes — but with a restriction. Under Rule 29(1)(iv), the Head of Department directly under the Central Government can revise orders in cases under his control. However, the second proviso to Rule 29(1) bars the Head of Department from exercising revision powers unless the authority which made the appellate order (or would have heard the appeal if none was preferred) is subordinate to him.

Revision and Review — Rules 29 and 29-A of CCS (CCA) Rules, 1965

Q: Is there a time limit for revision?

For the appellate authority exercising revision under Rule 29(1)(v), the time limit is 6 months from the date of the order proposed to be revised. Other authorities listed in Rule 29(1)(i) to (iv) and (vi) can revise at any time within the period prescribed in the relevant general or special order.

Revision and review are supervisory remedies that sit above the appeal mechanism. They are not a second right of appeal — they are powers vested in higher authorities to ensure that the overall outcome of a disciplinary case is just, lawful, and proportionate. The two are fundamentally different: revision requires no new material; review under Rule 29-A requires new evidence that changes the nature of the case.

Rule 29: Revision

Who Can Revise?

The following authorities may call for records and revise any order made under these Rules (or under the rules repealed by Rule 34) — whether or not an appeal was preferred:

The President — at any time;
The Comptroller and Auditor-General — in cases involving Government servants serving in the Indian Audit and Accounts Department;
The Member (Personnel), Postal Services Board (for Postal employees) and Adviser (Human Resources Development), Department of Telecommunications (for Telecom employees);
The Head of Department directly under the Central Government — for Government servants serving in departments or offices under his control (not the Secretariat or Posts and Telegraphs Board);
The Appellate authority — but only within 6 months of the date of the order proposed to be revised;
Any other authority specified by the President by general or special order, within the time prescribed in that order.

What Can a Revising Authority Do?

The revising authority may:

Confirm, modify, or set aside the order;
Confirm, reduce, enhance, or set aside the penalty — or impose a penalty where none was imposed;
Remit the case with directions for further inquiry;
Pass such other orders as it deems fit.

Safeguards Before Enhancing Penalty on Revision

The first proviso to Rule 29(1) contains important protections:

No order imposing or enhancing any penalty shall be made on revision unless the Government servant has been given a reasonable opportunity to represent against the proposed penalty;
Where the proposed penalty is a major penalty and no Rule 14 inquiry has been held, no such penalty may be imposed except after holding such an inquiry — subject to Rule 19;
UPSC consultation must be completed where required, and the Government servant given opportunity to represent on the UPSC's advice, before the order is passed.

Restriction on Comptroller and Auditor-General, Head of Department, and Others

The second proviso restricts these authorities: they cannot exercise revision powers unless the authority that made the order in appeal (or would have heard the appeal if none was preferred) is subordinate to them. This prevents lower authorities from revising orders made by their own superiors.

When Can Revision Proceedings Begin?

Under Rule 29(2), revision proceedings cannot be commenced until:

The expiry of the limitation period for an appeal; or
The disposal of any appeal that was preferred.

An application for revision is dealt with in the same manner as an appeal — Rule 29(3).

Rule 29-A: Review

Review is a distinct and narrower power. Only the President can exercise it — and only where:

New material or evidence has come to notice (or been brought to the President's notice) that could not be produced or was not available at the time of the original order; and
That new material or evidence has the effect of changing the nature of the case.

If these conditions are met, the President may review any order passed under these Rules — either on his own motion or on an application.

Safeguards Under Rule 29-A

The same protections as in revision apply to review:

No order imposing or enhancing any penalty shall be made without giving the Government servant a reasonable opportunity to represent;
If a major penalty is proposed and no Rule 14 inquiry was held, such an inquiry must be conducted first (subject to Rule 19);
UPSC consultation and the Government servant's right to represent on the UPSC's advice must be observed.

Revision vs. Review: Key Differences

Feature	Revision (Rule 29)	Review (Rule 29-A)
Who can invoke	Multiple authorities (President, CAG, Head of Dept, Appellate authority, etc.)	Only the President
New material required?	No — revisable on existing record	Yes — new evidence that changes the nature of the case
Time limit	Appellate authority: 6 months; others: at any time or as prescribed	At any time (after new material comes to notice)
Must await appeal disposal	Yes	Not specified (power exercisable at any time)

Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ)

Q1. What is the key difference between revision and review?

Revision (Rule 29) can be invoked by multiple authorities on the existing record — no new material is needed. Review (Rule 29-A) is only for the President and requires new material or evidence, not available at the time of the original order, that changes the nature of the case.

Q2. Can a Head of Department revise an appellate order?

Only if the authority that made the appellate order (or would have heard the appeal) is subordinate to him — per the second proviso to Rule 29(1).

Q3. Is there a time limit for revision?

The appellate authority has 6 months from the order to be revised. Other authorities (President, CAG, Head of Department) can revise at any time or within the period prescribed in the relevant order.