[1] DBCWP 2216/2010 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR O R D E R D.B. CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO. 2216/2010 DIVISIONAL ACCOUNTANTS ASSOCIATION Vs. UNION OF INDIA & ORS. Date: 17.02.2010. HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K.S. RATHORE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MAHESH BHAGWATI Mr. Ashok Gaur, Advocate for the petitioner. **** The present writ petition is directed against the order dated 15.10.2008 passed by the Central Administrative Tribunal, Jaipur Bench in Original Application No. 8/2008, by which the Original Application has been disposed of as the same rendered infructuous. The petitioner filed the Original Application before the Central Administrative Tribunal, Jaipur Bench praying for the following reliefs:- “8. On the basis of the facts and grounds stated, the applicants pray the following reliefs:- (a) quash and set aside the direction vide Annexure 1 dated 25.08.2007 directing the DAs working in the existing division to look after the work of DAs of newly created division in addition to their own duties. [2] DBCWP 2216/2010 (b) direct the respondents to create additional posts of DAs for each newly created division. (c) direct the respondents to adhere to the scheme of audit and accounts as spelt out in the account code, Act of 1971 and the various standing orders issued by the respondents from time to time. (d) issue any other appropriate writ, direction or orders granting any other suitable relief to the petitioner in the facts and circumstances of the case.” The said Original Application came to be disposed of by the Central Administrative Tribunal vide order impugned dated 15.10.2008 as it has become infructuous as the order dated 25.08.2007 mentioned in relief clause 8(a) has been withdrawn by the respondents and the relief 8(b) has not been pressed by the petitioner. At this stage, the petitioner is seeking relief 8(c) and requested that writ, order or direction may be issued to the respondents to adhere the scheme of audit and accounts as spelt out in the Accounts Code, Act of 1971 and various Standing Orders issued by the respondents from time to time. Having heard learned counsel for the petitioner, we are of the considered view that the petitioner should first represent before the respondents and if the respondents are not adhering the scheme of audit and accounts, as claimed by the petitioner, the petitioner has every right to [3] DBCWP 2216/2010 redress his grievance before an appropriate forum, but at this stage, no writ, order or direction is required to be issued. Consequently, the writ petition fails and the same is hereby dismissed. (MAHESH BHAGWATI),J. (K.S. RATHORE),J. /KKC/