1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD WRIT PETITION NO.144 OF 2010 Madhukar s/o Shriram Saner, R/o-Akshada Apartment, Adarsh Nagar, Jalgaon, Dist-Jalgaon. ...PETITIONER. VERSUS 1) The State of Maharashtra, Through the Secretary, Irrigation Department, Mantralaya, Mumbai. 2) The Executive Director, T.I.D.C. Jalgaon. 3) The Chief Engineer, T.I.D.C. Jalgaon, 4) The Superintendent Engineer, C.A.D.A. Jalgaon, 5) The Executive Engineer, Irrigation Division, Jalgaon. ...RESPONDENTS. ... Ms. Surekha Mahajan Advocate for Petitioner. Mr. R.P. Phatke, A.G.P. for Respondents. ... 2 CORAM: A.M. KHANWILKAR AND S.S. SHINDE, JJ. DATE : 11TH JANUARY, 2010. PER COURT : 1. Heard learned counsel for the parties. Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. By consent of the learned counsel for the parties, the matter is taken up for final hearing at the stage of admission itself. 2. One of the argument canvassed before us is that the Tribunal has completely lost sight of the effect of Rule 16 (i) of M.C.S.R. (D. & A.) Rules, 1979. It stipulates that no order made by the Governor is appealable. The order which was impugned before the Tribunal dated 7th November, 2009, expressly states that the same was passed on the basis of the order passed by the Governor. If it is so, it was not an appealable order and only remedy available to the Petitioner would be by way of original application by invoking the provisions 3 of Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985. According to the learned counsel appearing for the Petitioner, this issue was specifically argued before the Tribunal but has not been adverted to at all in the impugned Judgment which runs into almost 22 pages. 3. In our opinion, that question goes to the root of the matter, in the event the Petitioner is right in contending that the order in question is in effect an order passed by the Governor. The Petitioner, therefore is free to approach the Tribunal by way of review petition and/or for speaking to minutes as may be advised. The Tribunal may consider the same on its own merits and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law. 4. In the event the Tribunal rejects the plea taken by the Petitioner in relation to application of Rule 16 (i) of M.C.S.R. (D. & A.) Rules, 1979, it would be open to the Petitioner to re-agitate 4 the grounds raised in this Petition in respect of the other findings in the proposed Writ Petition to be filed before this Court. 5. Rule is made absolute on the terms indicated above. [S.S. SHINDE, J.] [A.M. KHANWILKAR, J.] asb/JAN10/wp144.10