1 56 D.B. CIVIL INTERLOCUTORY APPLICN. NO. 5067/2010. IN D.B. CIVIL SPECIAL APPEAL (W) NO. 538/2007. Jai Prakash Sharma Vs. Union of India & Ors. ... Date of Order :: 12th May 2010. HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A.M. SAPRE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DINESH MAHESHWARI Mr. B.S. Sandhu, for the appellant. Mr. V.R. Choudhary ] Ms. Pintu Pareek for ] Mr. V.S. Guajar, for the respondents. <><><> BY THE COURT: Heard the learned counsel on the application (IA No. 5067/2010). Having heard the learned counsel for the parties and on perusal of the record of the case, we are of the considered view that since a statutory remedy of filing an application before the Central Administrative Tribunal under Section 19 of the Central Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985 for adjudication of the grievance is available to writ petitioner (appellant herein) and hence writ petition out of which this intra-court appeal arises was not entertainable for any decision on merits under Article 226/227 of Constitution. Indeed this legal position is no longer remains res integra when we read the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court reported in (2002) 4 SCC 145 : Kendriya Vidyalaya Sangathan & Anr. Vs. Subhas Sharma. 2 (2) Accordingly and in view of the aforesaid discussion and having regard to the facts of the case, the nature of controversy involved and relief claimed, we allow the appellant to withdraw the writ petition, being S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 2552/2007 (Jai Prakash Sharma Vs. Union of India & Ors.) so also this writ appeal which arises out of the said writ petition. (3) Accordingly, we grant this liberty as prayed for to the appellant to take recourse of appropriate remedies available to him under the Central Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985 in accordance with law for adjudication of his rights for which he had filed the writ petition. It is with this liberty, the writ petition is dismissed as withdrawn. In this view of the matter, this appeal has become infructuous. (DINESH MAHESHWARI),J. (A.M. SAPRE),J. /Mohan/