Writ Petition Against CAT Order Under Articles 226 and 227

A final order of the Central Administrative Tribunal can be subjected to judicial review before the jurisdictional High Court under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India. This page explains the legal basis, practical filing points and provides a detailed specimen format that can be adapted to the facts of a service matter.

Important: A writ petition is not a statutory appeal on facts. The pleadings should identify a sustainable ground of judicial review, such as jurisdictional error, breach of natural justice, error of law, perversity, failure to consider material evidence, or violation of constitutional or statutory rights. Court rules, limitation practice, filing requirements and nomenclature may vary between High Courts.
Contents

The Central Administrative Tribunal is constituted under the Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985, enacted pursuant to Article 323A of the Constitution for adjudication of specified recruitment and service disputes involving public services and posts.

After the Constitution Bench decision in L. Chandra Kumar v. Union of India, decisions of administrative tribunals remain subject to scrutiny by a Division Bench of the High Court having territorial jurisdiction over the Tribunal concerned. The official CAT website also states that CAT orders are challenged by writ petition under Articles 226/227 before the respective High Court within whose territorial jurisdiction the Bench of the Tribunal is situated.

Article 226 Empowers a High Court to issue directions, orders or writs, including writs in the nature of habeas corpus, mandamus, prohibition, quo warranto and certiorari, for enforcement of fundamental rights and for other purposes.
Article 227 Confers supervisory jurisdiction on every High Court over courts and tribunals throughout the territories in relation to which it exercises jurisdiction, subject to the Constitution.

Articles 226 and 227: scope in a CAT challenge

A challenge to a CAT order commonly invokes Article 226 for judicial review and Article 227 for supervisory jurisdiction. The exact formulation should depend on the relief sought and the practice of the concerned High Court. The petition should focus on the legality of the Tribunal's decision-making process rather than merely seeking a rehearing of the original service dispute.

The Constitution can be accessed from the Legislative Department, Ministry of Law and Justice. The official Supreme Court material on L. Chandra Kumar is available from the Supreme Court of India.

Practical filing points before adapting the format

The petitioner should verify the applicable High Court rules and place the complete material necessary for judicial review on record. In a CAT matter this ordinarily includes the impugned CAT order, the original application, pleadings and rejoinders, material annexures, relevant departmental orders or rules, and other documents relied upon for the grounds raised in the writ petition.

Territorial jurisdiction is important. The CAT's official guidance states that the writ petition lies before the High Court within whose territorial jurisdiction the concerned Tribunal Bench is situated. The cause-of-action requirements under Article 226 and the relevant High Court rules should also be checked in the particular case.

If interim relief is required, the petition should separately explain urgency, prima facie case, balance of convenience and the prejudice likely to result if the CAT order is acted upon during pendency of the writ petition.

Specimen writ petition format to challenge CAT order

The following is a specimen based on the existing page. Blank fields and case-specific paragraphs must be adapted to the actual CAT proceedings, service rules, parties, dates, reliefs and High Court filing requirements.

Downloadable draft: Writ Petition format under Articles 226 and 227 to challenge a CAT order.

Official legal resources

For current statutory and institutional material, refer to the official sources linked above and in the sidebar. Users should verify amendments, court rules and case-specific procedural requirements before filing.