Judgment :- The petitioner seeks a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus to call for the records pertaining the impugned order passed by the 1st respondent in his Proceedings in Na.Ka.A1/1081/2006, dated ..12.2007 signed on 30.1.2008 and quash the same and direct the respondents to repay the recovered amount for the month of August 2008. 2. Ms. Lita Srinivasan, learned Government Advocate takes notice for the respondents. 3. This writ petition challenges the order of the 1st respondent dated 30.1.2008, stated to have been received by the petitioner only recently. Under the impugned order, a punishment has been imposed under Rule. 17(b), withholding annual increment for a period of two years with cumulative effect, taking into consideration that any severe punishment would affect the petitioners pensionary benefits. 4. In the affidavit, filed in support of the writ petition, it is stated that pursuant to the impugned order, the respondents are making recovery from the salary of the petitioner at the rate of Rs.2500/-per month from 30.1.2008. 5. The impugned order makes it clear that as against the order, the petitioner has got a right of appeal to the District Revenue Officer. Inasmuch as the petitioner has got alternative remedy, the writ petition cannot be entertained at this stage. 6. In view of the above, the writ petition is dismissed with liberty to the petitioner to approach the District Revenue Officer. No costs. Consequently, the connected M.Ps are closed. 7. It is made clear that if such appeal is filed within in a period of 15 days from the date of receipt of copy of this order, the appellate authority shall receive, consider the same and pass orders on merits and in accordance with law, without rejecting it on the ground of limitation. 8. It is also made clear that till the appellate authority passes appropriate order, no further recovery shall be made. If any recovery is already made, the same shall not be affected by this order.