IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR S.A.W. No.745/2009 Dr.Madan Mohan Vs. State of Rajasthan & Ors. Date of order : 16.12.2010 HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE A.M.SAPRE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE C.M.TOTLA Mr. D.K. Godara, for the appellant. Mr. M.A. Siddiqui ] Mr. Yashpal Khileree for the respondent. <><><> This is an appeal filed by the writ petitioner of W.P. No.5267/2005 under Rule 134 of the Rajasthan High Court Rules, 1952 read with Article 225 of the Constitution of India against an order dated 15.7.2009 passed in abovementioned writ petition. By impugned order, the Writ Court declined to entertain the writ petition essentially on the ground that remedy of the writ petitioner (appellant herein) lies in fling a case before the Tribunal, rather than in the writ petition. This is what learned Single Judge observed while declining to entertain the writ petition: “Heard learned counsel for the parties. Learned counsel for the respondent submitted that in identical facts and circumstances, this Court in SBCWP No.806/2005 – Smt. Harbans Kuar Vs. State of Rajasthan & Ors. decided on 19.5.2009 did not entertain the writ petition and liberty was given to the petitioner to approach the tribunal under the relevant rules against the order of suspension. In view of the above reason, this writ petition is dismissed with liberty to the petitioner to approach the appellate forum under the rules.” We find no case to interfere in such order when learned Single Judge declined to entertain the writ petition and granted liberty to the appellant (writ petitioner) to take recourse to the remedy available by filing a case before the Tribunal. We fail to understand as to what prejudice has caused to the writ petitioner with such an order. After all liberty is granted to the appellant to file a case before the Tribunal to get his right adjudicated from the tribunal. If that is so, then Tribunal will be under legal obligation to decide the matter as and when and if filed by the writ petitioner. Accordingly and in view of the aforesaid, we find no merit in this appeal and while dismissing the appeal, reiterate the liberty granted to the appellant to take recourse by approaching the Tribunal concerned to ventilate his grievances by challenging the order of suspension. Needless to observe that if any such remedy is resorted by the appellant by filing a case before the Tribunal, the same shall be examined and decided in accordance with law. With these observations and liberty, the appeal fails and is dismissed in limine. (C.M.TOTLA), J. (A.M.SAPRE ), J. /bjsh s36