IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATES OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CWP No.15822 of 2010 Date of decision : 7.9.2010 Siri Narayan … Appellant Versus Union of India and others …Respondents Coram: Hon’ble Mr.Justice M.M.Kumar Hon’ble Ms.Justice Ritu Bahri Present: Mr.I.D.Singla, Advocate for the petitioner. 1. To be referred to the Reporters or not? 2. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest? M.M.Kumar, J. The instant writ petition filed under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution, is directed against judgment dated 31.3.2008 rendered by the Central Administrative Tribunal, Chandigarh (for brevity the ‘Tribunal’) refusing to quash order dated 5.8.2008 (Annexure P-5) holding that under Rule 25, review was not competent when the appeal has been filed and the same was rejected. The petitioner did not challenge the order of punishment dated 11.11.2007 (Annexure P-1) before the Tribunal and there is no finding in the impugned judgment of the Tribunal to that effect. Learned counsel for the petitioner states that he may be permitted to withdraw the instant writ petition and liberty may be granted to seek relief before the Tribunal by moving an appropriate application for recalling of the impugned judgment and amendment of the original application and the Tribunal may be directed to decide the matter on merit. We are of the view that merely because the learned counsel for the petitioner was not able to advice him to challenge the order dated CWP No.15822 of 2010 11.11.2007 (Annexure P-1) and order dated 31.3.2008 (Annexure P-3), it should not stand in his way. The right of the petitioner to challenge the aforesaid orders, could not be defeated on account of the aforesaid error. Accordingly, we accept the request made by the learned counsel for the petitioner in terms of the prayer made. Petition stands disposed of in the above terms. (M.M.Kumar ) Judge (Ritu Bahri) Judge 07.09.2010 sd 2