RAMESH GIRI vs UNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS

K.M. JOSEPH, C.J

This writ petition is filed challenging Annexure No. 7 dated 25.02.2016 passed by the Under Secretary, Ministry of Defence, Government of India.

We heard Mr. Pawan Mishra, learned counsel on behalf of the petitioner and Mr. Sanjay Bhatt, Standing Counsel on behalf of the Union of India/respondents.

Mr. Sanjay Bhatt, learned Standing Counsel for the respondents would point out that the petitioner has a remedy by way of an appeal and where there is power to condone the delay under Rule 25 of the Central Civil Services (Classification, Control and Appeal) Rules, 1965. We may, incidentally, notice that it is not clear whether the approach, even otherwise to this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, is justified having regard to the provisions of the Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985, but we do not wish to hazard any opinion on this in the absence of any details regarding it, but the question is, whether it is covered by the said Act. According to Mr. Sanjay Bhatt, learned Standing Counsel for the respondents appeal lies under Rule 24 of the Central Civil Services (Classification, Control and Appeal) Rules, 1965.

But having regard to the objection raised regarding existence of alternate remedy, we decline jurisdiction and dismiss the writ petition and we relegate the petitioner to pursue any alternate remedy, which is available to the petitioner.