IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL Writ Petition (S/S) No. 446 of 2011 R.L. Tamta ….Petitioner. Versus State of Uttarakhand and others …Respondents. Sri Pawan Mishra, Advocate present for the petitioner. Sri N.P. Sah, Standing Counsel present for the State of Uttarakhand. Sri Raman Kumar Shah, Standing Counsel present for the Union of India. Hon’ble Sudhanshu Dhulia, J. (Oral) Heard Sri Pawan Mishra, Advocate for the petitioner, Sri N.P. Sah, Standing Counsel for the State of Uttarakhand as well as Sri Raman Kumar Shah, Standing Counsel for the Union of India. The petitioner has filed this writ petition seeking intervention from this Court to relieve the petitioner from 84, UK Battalion, NCC, Roorkee, District Haridwar, since such orders have been passed by the NCC Battalion placed at Roorkee. A preliminary objection has been raised by the counsel representing Union of India Sri Raman Kumar Shah that the writ petition is not maintainable in the first instance before this Court as the first remedy available to the petitioner is to seek remedy before the Central Administrative Tribunal in view of the Constitution Bench Judgment in L. Chandra Kumar Vs. Union of India and others AIR 1997 SC 1125. Counsel representing the Union of India Sri Raman Kumar Shah further contends that in this case jurisdiction is before the Central Administrative Tribunal in view of Section 14 (1) (b) (iii) of the Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985. Section 14 (1) (b) (iii) of the Administrative Tribunals Act reads as under :- “14. Jurisdiction, powers and authority of the Central Administrative Tribunal. – (1) Save as otherwise expressly provided in this Act, the central Administrative Tribunal shall exercise, on and from the appointed day, all the jurisdiction, powers and authority 2 exercisable immediately before that day by all courts (except the Supreme Court in relation to – (a) …. (b) all service matters concerning – (i) … (ii) … (iii) a civilian [not being a member of an All-India Service or a person referred to in clause (c)] appointed to any defence services or a post connected with defence, and pertaining to the service of such member, person or civilian, in connection with the affairs of the Union or any State or of any local or other authority within the territory of India or under the control of the Government of India or of any corporation [or society] owned or controlled by the Government; (c) … [Explanation. – For the removal of doubts, it is hereby declared that references to “Union” in this sub-section shall be construed as including references also to a Union territory.]” Evidently, the petitioner is a civilian appointed in defence service or a post connected with the defence. The matter is therefore cognizable in the first instance by the Central Administrative Tribunal. Writ petition is therefore dismissed on the ground of alternative remedy. No order as to costs. (Sudhanshu Dhulia, J.) 8.6.2011 Avneet