Judgment 1. Heard Dr. S.R Singh, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. K. Ravis for the respondents. 2. This writ application is directed against the order dated 10th January, 2007 whereby and whereunder the O.A. applica- tion filed by the petitioner against the order of departmental action was dismissed. 3. It appears that the petitioner was proceeded against departmentally and on conclusion of the departmental proceeding certain punishment was imposed upon him. He challenged the order of punishment before the CAT. His application earlier filed was allowed and the matter was remitted back to the disciplinary authority to recon- sider the matter. 4. The authorities on reconsideration of the matter again held him guilty and inflicted the punisment which again was challenged before the CAT without filing statutory appeal against the disciplinary action. The CAT on appreciation of facts held that the O.A. application was not maintainable before it inasmuch as that the remedy of statutory appeal was not availed and accordingly took a lenient view of the matter and disposed of the O.A. application with a direction that this appli- cation may be treated as a memo of appeal which would be duly considered by the appellate authority by giving an oppor- tunity of hearing. The petitioner despite order passed by the CAT again moved this Court by this application. 5. Learned counsel appearing on be- half of the petitioner submits that the de- partmental appeal was not an efficacious remedy, therefore, this application has been filed in this Court. 6. Against any departmental action if statute provides for statutory appeal, that must be availed. Statutory provision cannot be by-passed by rushing to this Court making out a jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. The view taken by the CAT in this view of the matter, is wholly in consonance with law and in our opinion should not be interfered with. 7. This application is, accordingly, dis- missed.