Judgment :- S.J. Mukhopadhaya, J. This Writ Appeal has been preferred by the Director of School Education, Chennai and five others, against the order dated 4. 2006 passed by the learned single Judge in Writ Petition No.9582 of 2006, whereby the Court directed the appellants to implement the order dated 5. 1995 passed by the Tami Nadu Administrative Tribunal, in Original Application No.2545 of 1995. The order dated 4. 2006 passed by the learned single Judge in Writ Petition No.9582 of 2006 reads as follows: "The petitioners have approached this Court, seeking for a direction to the respondents to implement the order of the Tamil Nadu Administrative Tribunal made in O.A. No.2545 of 1995 dated 04.05.1995. The Tribunal in its order has directed as follows: "So, we direct the respondents to revert the applicants to their respective Panchayat Unions as Elementary School Headmaster with reference to their seniority in the respective Panchayat Unions and award the consequential pay scale of Special Grade Elementary School Headmaster with effect from 6. 1988. Orders should be issued within three weeks from the date of receipt of this order or a copy thereof. The application is ordered as above" 2. After the orders of the Tribunal, the petitioner has made a representation on 06.02.2005. As the said representation has not been considered so far, the petitioner has come forward with the present Writ Petition seeking for a direction to the respondents to implement the order of the Tribunal. 3. Considering the above, there will be a direction to the respondent to implement the order of the Tribunal dated 04.05.1995 made in O.A. No.2545 of 1995 within a period of eight weeks from the date of receipt of copy of this order or on production of the same by the petitioner. The Writ Petition is disposed of accordingly. No costs." 2. Learned Special Government Pleader appearing for the appellants, submitted that the order dated 5. 1995 passed by the Tamil Nadu Administrative Tribunal in O.A.No.2545 of 1995, is not in accordance with law, but such submission cannot be accepted. As the appellants never challenged the said order dated 5. 1995, before any Court of Law, the same reached finality. Even if it is presumed that the order dated 5. 1995 passed by the Tamil Nadu Administrative Tribunal in O.A.No.2545 of 1995, is not in accordance with law, but such submission cannot be accepted. As the appellants never challenged the said order dated 5. 1995, before any Court of Law, the same reached finality. Even if it is presumed that the order dated 5. 1995 passed by the Tribunal is not in accordance with law, we are not deliberating on that issue, such order being binding between the parties, the same having reached finality. However, such order cannot be quoted as a precedent in any other case. The appellants cannot challenge the order dated 5. 1995 indirectly which they cannot challenge directly. 3. In the above context, one may refer to the decision of the Supreme Court in the case of "Maharaj Krishan Bhatt vs. State of J & K", reported in 2008 (9) SCC 24, wherein, the Supreme Court held that once a judgment had attained finality, it could not be termed as wrong and its benefit ought to have been extended. 4. We find no merits in this Writ Appeal, which is accordingly dismissed, but in the facts and circumstances of the case, there shall be no order as to costs. The Miscellaneous Petition is closed.