IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL Writ Petition No. 1813 of 2007 (S/S) Shri D.K. Singh & 37 others. ….....Petitioners. Versus Union of India & 19 others. ……….Respondents. Shri Rakesh Thapliyal, learned counsel for the petitioner. Smt. Anjali Bhargava, learned Standing Counsel for respondents No. 1 to 5. Shri Sudhanshu Dhulia, Sr. Advocate, assisted by Shri Rahul Consul, learned counsel for the respondents No. 6 to 20. Hon’ble Prafulla C. Pant, J. Heard learned counsel for the parties. 2. By means of this writ petition, the petitioners have sought writ in the nature of certiorari quashing the order dated 09.10.1996, issued by General Manager of OPTO, Electronics Factory, Dehradun, which relates to grant of benefit of scale of Rs. 1400- 2300 w.e.f. the date of induction of private respondents (No. 6 to 20) in the pay scale of Rs. 1200-2040. A further mandamus has been sought quashing the circular No. 52 (2)/96/III/D (F.Y.-II), dated 01.07.1996, copy of which is annexure-6 to the writ petition, which is allegedly got forged in giving benefit to respondents No. 6 to 20, deleting the condition of five years service in the previous scale. 2 3. Learned counsel for Union of India and learned counsel for respondents no. 6 to 20, jointly raised preliminary objection to the writ petition that the petitioners have their remedy in the Central Administrative Tribunal, available to them. In this connection, attention of this Court is drawn to case of L. Chandra Kumar (1997) Volume III Supreme Court Cases Pg. 261, in which it has been held that when the jurisdiction lies with the Central Administrative Tribunal, the parties should approach first to the tribunal only then they can seek constitutional remedy available under Article 226 of Constitution of India. A short counter affidavit filed on behalf of the respondents No. 1 to 5, shows that 34 out of 38 petitioners have already moved to the tribunal, challenging the seniority of the private respondents No. 6 to 20 in O.A. No. 1463 of 2000, A.K. Shukla and others Vs. Union of India, pending before Central Administrative Tribunal, Allahabad. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that O.A. No. 1463 of 2000, pertains to inter-se seniority between the petitioners and the private respondents, while in the present case, quashing of allegedly forged circular has been sought on the basis of which order dated 09.10.1996, was passed granting the respondents No. 6 to 20 pay scale of Rs. 1400-2300. 3 5. Without expressing any opinion as to the merits of the case, and genuineness of document (copy annexure VI to the writ petition) since admittedly the matter raised before this Court, can be heard and decided by the Central Administrative Tribunal, this Court is not inclined to interfere in the matter at this stage. Therefore, the writ petition is dismissed, leaving it open to the petitioners to raise the issue before the tribunal. (Prafulla C. Pant, J.) Dt. 07.08.2008 Sweta 4