HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE K.C. BHANU WRIT PETITION No. 9996 of 2011 ORDER: The petitioner was appointed as Additional Programme Officer by the Committee constituted by the 2nd respondent on a monthly wages of Rs.9,000/- and it was enhanced from time to time. Thereafter, the third respondent issued a show cause notice with regard to certain irregularities identified, for which, the petitioner submitted his detailed explanation. However, the third respondent passed the impugned order dated 30.3.2001 terminating the services of the petitioner. Challenging the same, the present writ petition is filed. Learned counsel for the petitioner contended that there is no appeal provision provided under the Rules, that when the appeal is filed before the District Collector, the Collector concerned is not entertaining the appeal. On the other hand, the learned Assistant Government Pleader stated that as per Circular No.143/SRDS/HR Manual/2009, dated 1.10.2010, an appeal is provided for, and on termination of the services of technical Assistant/Computer Operator-cum-Accounts Assistant/ Additional Programme Officer, an appeal shall lie with the Member Secretary, SRDS & Spl. Commissioner & R.D. within 30 days from the date of service of the order. Article 226 of Constitution of India empowers High courts to issue such writs, directions or orders for enforcement of the fundamental rights or “for any other purpose”. It is well settled that the remedy provided for in Article 226 is a discretionary remedy and the High court has always discretion to refuse to grant such relief in certain circumstances even though a legal right might have been infringed. Availability of an alternative remedy is one of such considerations, which the High Court may take into account in refusing to exercise the jurisdiction. No doubt, alternative remedy is not a bar for entertaining the writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. But, in such a case, the petitioner has to establish one of the three contingencies : (1) The writ petition is filed for enforcement of a fundamental right; (2) The authority has no jurisdiction to pass an order (3) Violation of the principles of natural justice. The case of the petitioner does not fall under any one of the three categories. When a statutory appeal is provided for, the petitioner has to avail the same. The impugned order also shows that an appeal lies against the impugned order to the appellate authority. But, the impugned order does not indicate the competent authority to whom the appeal can be filed. The learned Assistant Government Pleader brought to the notice of this Court about Circular No. 143/SRDS/HR Manual/2009, dated 1.10.2010, which provides for an appeal on termination of services of the Technical Assistant/Computer Operator-cum-Accounts Assistant/Additional Programme Officer to the Member Secretary, SRDS & Special Commissioner & R.D., within 30 days from the date of service of order. Sri G. Elisha, learned counsel for the 4th respondent also submits that the petitioner has to file an appeal before the Member Secretary, SRDS & Special Commissioner & R.D., against the impugned order. So, in view of the said circular instructions, the writ petition is disposed of directing the petitioner to avail the alternative remedy of filing an appeal before the Member Secretary, SRDS & Special Commissioner & R.D., and on filing such appeal within three weeks from today, the appellate authority shall dispose of the same within eight weeks from the date of filing of the appeal by the petitioner, after giving due opportunity to the petitioner. The writ petition is accordingly disposed of. No costs. ______________ K.C. BHANU,J DATE: 20th April, 2011 Note: Furnish c.c. in one week. B/o pnb