1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY O. O. C. J. WRIT PETITION NO.1395 OF 2006 Sunil Prabhakar Pitale. ...Petitioner. Vs. The Union of India & Ors. ...Respondents. .... Mr.M. R. Deshpande for the Petitioner. Mrs. N.V. Masurkar for the Respondents. ..... CORAM : SWATANTER KUMAR, C.J. & DR.D.Y.CHANDRACHUD, J. September 12, 2007. P.C. : In the order impugned by the Petitioner in the present Petition, the Central Administrative Tribunal, inter alia, held as under : “Under the circumstances, I do not feel that it is a case where the Tribunal should interfere in the matter or even issue notice to the respondents. In any case, as mentioned above, Prasar Bharati has not been notified under Section 14 of the Administrative Tribunals Act.” 2. The contention of the Counsel appearing for the Petitioner is that once the Tribunal has found that it has no jurisdiction to entertain and decide the present petition for want of notification under Section 14 of the Act, it ought not to have recorded any finding on the 2 merits of the case. 3. Besides the fact that the petition is not maintainable before the Tribunal, the Petitioner has also questioned the correctness of the order of transfer in the present Writ Petition. We do not propose to dismiss this petition in relation to that relief, keeping in view the fact that the Learned Counsel appearing for the Petitioner on instructions from the Petitioner who is present in Court, states that he will join at Aurangabad by 1st October 2007. The petition is disposed of. The Petitioner will abide by his statement. CHIEF JUSTICE Dr.D.Y. CHANDRACHUD, J.