ORDER C.K. Prasad, J. 1. One, amongst several questions raised and falling for determination in the present writ petitions filed under Articles 226/227 of the Constitution of India is as follows :-- Whether the remedy provided under Rule 12 of the M.P. Panchayat Shiksha Karmi (Recruitment and Conditions of Service) Rules, 1997 is confined to the remedy of appeal or the same extends to the remedy of revision, as provided under Section 91 of the M.P. Panchayat Raj Act, 1993 read with Rule 5 of the M.P. Panchayat (Appeal and Revision) Rules, 1995. 2. Decision of the aforesaid question requires reference to the following statutory provision. Government of Madhya Pradesh in exercise of the powers conferred under Section 53 (2), Section 70 (1) read with Section 95 of the M.P. Panchayat Raj Act, 1993 framed the Madhya Pradesh Panchayat Shiksha Karmi (Recruitment and Condition of Service) Rules, 1997 (hereinafter referred to as the Recruitment Rules). Rule 12 of the Recruitment Rules provides as follows : -- "12. Appeal:--Appeal against the order passed under these Rules may be made as per provisions of the Adhiniyam." Expression "Adhiniyam" used in Rule 12 of the Recruitment Rules has been defined under Rule 2 (a) of the said Rules which reads as follows :-- "2. Definitions :-- In these Rules, unless the context otherwise requires :-- (a) "Adhiniyam" means the Madhya Pradesh Panchayat Raj Adhiniyam, 1993 (No. 1 of 1994) (b) ....................... " Section 91 of the M.P. Panchayat Raj Act, 1993 (hereinafter referred to as the Act) reads as follows :-- "91. Appeal and revision :-- An appeal or revision against the orders or proceedings of a Panchayat and other authorities under this Act, shall lie to such authority and in such manner as may be prescribed." State Government in exercise of the powers conferred under Section 95 (1) read with Section 91 of the Act had framed the M.P. Panchayat (Appeal and Revision) Rules, 1995 (hereinafter referred to as the Appeal and Revision Rules) and Rules 3 and 5 which are relevant for the purpose read as follows:-- "3. Appeal and appellate authorities :-- Save where it has been otherwise provided in the Act or rules or bye-laws made thereunder, an appeal shall lie,-- (a) in the case of an order passed by the Sub-Divisional Officer under any provision of the Act or rules or byelaws made thereunder to the Collector. Appeal and appellate authorities :-- Save where it has been otherwise provided in the Act or rules or bye-laws made thereunder, an appeal shall lie,-- (a) in the case of an order passed by the Sub-Divisional Officer under any provision of the Act or rules or byelaws made thereunder to the Collector. (b) in the case of an order passed by the Collector under any provision of the Act or rules or bye laws made thereunder to the Commissioner. (c) in the case of an order passed by the Commissioner or Director of Panchayats to the State Government. (d) in the case of an order passed by the Panchayat specified in Column (1) of the Table below-- to the authority specified in the corresponding entry in column (2) thereto. TABLE (1) (2) (a) Gram Panchayat Sub-Divisional Officer (b) Janpad Panchayat Collector (c) Zila Panchayat Commissioner 5. Revision.-- (1) (a) The State Government, the Commissioner, the Director of Panchayat, the Collector may on its/his own motion or on the application by any party, at any time for the purpose of satisfying itself/himself as to the legality or propriety of any order passed by or as to the regularity of the proceeding of, the authority subordinate to it/him call for and examine the record of any case pending before, or disposed of by, such authority and may pass such order in reference thereto as it/he may think fit: Provided that it/he shall not vary or reverse any order unless notice has been served on the parties interested and opportunity given to them for being heard : Provided further that no application for revision shall be entertained against an order appealable under the Act. (b) An application for revision by any party shall only be entertained if it is on the point of law and not on facts. (2) Notwithstanding anything contained in Sub-rule (1).-- (i) Where proceedings in respect of any case have been commenced by the State Government under Sub-rule (1) no action shall be taken by other Officer mentioned in the said Sub-rule in respect thereof. (2) Notwithstanding anything contained in Sub-rule (1).-- (i) Where proceedings in respect of any case have been commenced by the State Government under Sub-rule (1) no action shall be taken by other Officer mentioned in the said Sub-rule in respect thereof. (ii) Where proceeding in respect of any such case have been commenced by the Officer mentioned in Sub-rule (1), the State Government may either refrain from taking any action under this rule in respect of such case until the final disposal of such proceeding by such officer or may withdraw such proceeding and pass such order as it may deem fit." 3. After quoting the relevant statutory provisions, I proceed to consider the submissions made by learned counsel for the petitioners. They have drawn my attention to Rule 12 of the Recruitment Rules and contend that when this rule has provided for "appeal against the order passed" remedy of revision is not available to the petitioners. They submit that the expression "appeal" used in Rule 12 of the Recruitment Rules cannot be read to mean and include revision as this would amount to adding words in the statute which is impermissible. Their further submission is that "appeal and revision" are words well known in law and when the rule making authority has not included the word revision in Rule 12 of the Recruitment Rules, one can safely infer that the rule making authority purposely did not intend to give remedy of revision to the aggrieved person. Learned counsel representing the State of M.P., however, contends that the remedy provided under Rule 12 of the Recruitment Rules cannot be confined to the remedy of appeal only. 4. Having given my most anxious consideration to the rival submissions, I am of the opinion that the remedy provided under Rule 12 of the Recruitment Rules extends upto remedy of revision and the reasons which weighed with me to arrive at this conclusion are hereinafter mentioned. 5. Rule 12 of the Recruitment Rules quoted in the preceding paragraph of this order provides for appeal against the order passed in accordance with the Act. Rule 2 (a) of the Recruitment Rules defines Act which means Madhya Pradesh Panchayat Raj Act, 1993. Section 91 of the Panchayat Raj Act provides for appeal and revision, both according to the procedure laid down by Rules. Rule 2 (a) of the Recruitment Rules defines Act which means Madhya Pradesh Panchayat Raj Act, 1993. Section 91 of the Panchayat Raj Act provides for appeal and revision, both according to the procedure laid down by Rules. Rule 3 of the Appeal and Revision rules provides for appeal whereas Rule 5 provides for revision. In my opinion, when the rule making authority has used the expression "appeal" as per provision in the Act and Section 91 of the Act having provided for appeal and revision both expression "appeal" used in Rule 12 of the Recruitment Rules has to be read to mean revision also. 6. There is yet another reason to arrive at the aforesaid conclusion. Expression "appeal" is not a word of art and its simple meaning is complaint to a superior Court of an injustice done by an inferior one. According to Black's Law Dictionary, VIth Edition, appeal means resort to superior Court to review the decision of an inferior Court or administrative agency. A complaint to a higher tribunal of an error or injustice committed by a lower tribunal in which the error or injustice is sought to be corrected or reversed. A person aggrieved by the order of the appellate Court may appeal to the revisional Court for re-examination and pray for reversal of judgment of inferior Court which in his opinion has resulted into injustice to him. Thus, in my opinion simply because the rule making authority has used the expression "appeal" in Rule 12 of the Recruitment Rules, in the face of the scheme of the Act and Appeal and Revision Rules made thereunder, I am not inclined to give a restricted meaning to the word "appeal". In my considered opinion when Rule 12 of the Recruitment Rules has provided for remedy of appeal it shall include the remedy of revision also. 7. In some of the cases the stand of the petitioners is that even if it is held that remedy of appeal shall mean and include revision, still under the scheme of the Act and the Appeal and Revision Rules framed thereunder, no such revision is permissible. Learned counsel in this connection has drawn my attention to second proviso to Rule 5 (1) (a) of the Appeal and Revision Rules which inter-alia provides that no application for revision shall be entertained against an order appealable under the Act. Learned counsel in this connection has drawn my attention to second proviso to Rule 5 (1) (a) of the Appeal and Revision Rules which inter-alia provides that no application for revision shall be entertained against an order appealable under the Act. Learned counsel contends that as the appeal has been preferred, according to the proviso no application for revision is fit to be entertained. This argument I have noted only to keep the records straight and I do not have the slightest hesitation in rejecting this submission. Proviso referred to above in my opinion would mean that when order is appealable then in that case no revision shall lie, put the said proviso cannot be construed to mean that against the appellate order revision does not lie. Expression "appealable" used in the proviso referred to above cannot be read as appellate order. If that be so, the remedy of revision shall become illusory. 8. In view of my answer to the question posed at the out set that the petitioners have statutory alternative remedy of revision, I am not inclined to enter into the merits of this case at this stage and I would prefer to dismiss the writ petitions on this ground alone. Petitioners, if so advised, may invoke the remedy of revision within 30 days from today and, in case, such a remedy is invoked, the revisional authority shall decide revision application on merits. 9. In the result, all these writ petitions stand dismissed with the aforesaid observation. In the facts and circumstances of the case, there shall be no order as to cost.