WP(C) 2571/2010 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE RANJAN GOGOI THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE B.P. KATAKEY (By Ranjan Gogoi, J.) We have heard Mr. S. Sarma, learned counsel for the petitioner, Mr. NK B orah, learned Central Government Counsel appearing on behalf of Respondent Nos.1 , 3, 4 and 5 and Mrs. Manjula Das, learned counsel appearing on behalf of Respon dent Nos. 2 and 6. It has been submitted before us by Shri S. Sarma, learned counsel for th e petitioner that the impugned order of transfer dated 28.7.2009 challenged befo re the learned Tribunal is null and void as by the said order the petitioner has been transferred to the Directorate of Accounts (P) which is a separate establi shment. In this regard, Shri Sarma has drawn out attention to the statements mad e in paragraph 4.2 of the Original Application No. 272 of 2009 as well as the av erments contained in paragraph-3 of the rejoinder affidavit to show that the afo resaid ground was pleaded in the Original Application filed before the learned T ribunal. However, a reading of the order dated 21.4.2010 passed by the learned T ribunal does not indicate any finding on the said question now urged before us. In the above circumstances, we are of the view that instead of filing th is writ petition, the petitioner ought to have moved the learned Tribunal by way of review with a prayer to recall the order dated 21.4.2010 and hear the applic ation before it on the aforesaid issue i.e. whether the Directorate of Accounts (P) is a separate establishment and, if so, whether the petitioner could have be en transferred to the said establishment. Consequently, we decline to admit this writ petition and deem it appropr iate to leave it open for the petitioner to move the learned Tribunal by way of review. The writ petition stands disposed of in the above terms.