A SATYANARAYANA REDDY Vs. GOVERNMENT OF A P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) A question was posed across the Bar as to whether having regard to the decision of the apex Court in L. Chandra Kumar v. Union of India, AIR 1997 SC 1125, this writ application is maintainable.

(2.) Learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner, relying upon a Division Bench judgment of this Court in V. Vinod Rao v. Government of A.P., 1991 (1) ALD 147 (DB), submits that a party can directly approach the High Court in the first instance. The said decision, in our considered opinion, goes against the contention of the learned Counsel for the petitioner as would appear from the following observation of the Division Bench:

(3.) Certain observations had been made by the learned Bench as regards the power of this Court under Article 227 of the Constitution of India. But such observations, in our opinion, do not go to the rescue of the petitioner herein having regard to the decision of the Apex Court in L. Chandra humor's case clearly laying down that an aggrieved person has to approach the Administrative Tribunal in the first instance.