Tribunal first-instance rule bars direct High Court recourse in service disputes unless the tribunal statute itself is challenged

Tribunals under Articles 323-A and 323-B are the court of first instance for matters within their jurisdiction, with High Court supervision available only by judicial review under Articles 226 and 227. A litigant cannot bypass the Tribunal and directly invoke the High Court merely because a statute's vires is questioned; direct recourse is exceptional only where the Tribunal-creating statute itself is challenged. The text also notes that parties who knew of the Tribunal proceedings but did not first pursue the statutory remedy, including review where available, could not treat the High Court as the initial forum. The Constitution Bench rule was binding under Article 141, and the direct approach to the High Court was not maintainable.

---

---

Issues: Whether persons who were not parties before the Central Administrative Tribunal could directly approach the High Court, and thereafter pursue the appeal, in respect of service disputes within the Tribunal's original jurisdiction.

Analysis: The governing principle is that Tribunals constituted under Articles 323-A and 323-B function as the only court of first instance for matters within their jurisdiction, subject to judicial review by the High Court under Articles 226 and 227. Even where the vires of legislation is questioned, litigants cannot bypass the Tribunal and directly invoke the High Court's jurisdiction, except where the statute creating the Tribunal itself is challenged. The appellants, though aware of the Tribunal proceedings, did not first pursue the remedy before the Tribunal, including review where available, and therefore could not treat the High Court as the forum of first instance. The rule declared by the Constitution Bench was binding on the High Court under Article 141.

Conclusion: The direct approach to the High Court was not maintainable, and the appeals were liable to be dismissed.

---