YOGENDRA MITTAL Vs. UNION OF INDIA & ANR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The order impugned in this petition is of 18th December, 2017 (Annexure-A), which declines petitioner's application seeking appointment of an advocate as Defence Assistant in the departmental proceedings pending against petitioner.

(2.) At the outset, learned counsel for respondents submits that against impugned order, petitioner has to approach the Central Administrative Tribunal, New Delhi.

(3.) Learned counsel for petitioner submits that impugned order is an interlocutory one and so, in view of Rule 22 (ii) of the Central Civil Services (Classification, Control and Appeal) Rules [for short CCS (CCA) Rules], this petition is maintainable, as the remedy lies before the Administrative Tribunal against a final order.