Failure to exhaust statutory revision does not bar challenging disciplinary and appellate orders before the Administrative Tribunal.

The review applicant, a Senior Parcel Clerk, originally filed OA No. 663 of 2018 to challenge orders passed by the Disciplinary and Appellate Authorities

On 13.07.2018, the Tribunal dismissed the OA on the grounds that the applicant had failed to exhaust the alternative remedy of "Revision" available under Rule 29 of the CCS (CCA) Rules, 1965

The applicant filed the present Review Application (RA) on 16.08.2018, asserting that there is no mandatory requirement to seek revision if an appeal has already been decided, and that the dismissal was contrary to Section 20 of the Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985

1. Whether an Original Application (OA) can be dismissed for failure to avail the remedy of revision under service rules when a final order has already been passed in a departmental appeal

2. Whether the order dated 13.07.2018 contains an error apparent on the face of the record warranting a review

Section 20 of the Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985, which governs the exhaustion of alternative remedies

Section 20(2)(a) stipulates that a person is deemed to have exhausted remedies if a final order has been made by the competent authority rejecting an appeal or representation

Rule 29 of the CCS (CCA) Rules, 1965, which provides for the discretionary remedy of Revision

The Tribunal examined the statutory framework of Section 20 of the Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985, against the facts of the case.

It noted that while service rules may provide for a revision, the Act deems remedies exhausted once a final order on an appeal or representation is passed

The applicant had already approached the Tribunal after his departmental appeal was decided

The Bench reasoned that dismissing an OA solely for not pursuing a revision is inconsistent with the statutory deeming provision of Section 20(2)(a)

Consequently, the Tribunal found the grounds for review acceptable, concluding that the previous order dated 13.07.2018 was contrary to law and should be declared non-est to allow for a hearing on the merits

The court held that non-availing of the remedy of revision is not a valid ground to dismiss an OA if the departmental appeal has already been concluded

The Registry was directed to list the original OA for hearing on admission on 04.05.2026

All associated Miscellaneous Applications were disposed of without costs