( 1 ) IN these two writ petitions, the following question of law arises for consideration :"whether in view of Section 19 of the Administrative Tribunal Act, 1985, ('the Act for short), an Administrative tribunal constituted under sub-section (1) or (2) of Section 4 of the Act, has no jurisdiction to entertain applications regarding redressal of the grievances of civil servants of the Union or of the State concerned, as the case may be, in respect of service matters or matters relating to recruitment in the absence of an order made by the Government or any other authority and to issue appropriate directions or to make appropriate orders, and if so, whether in such circumstances a writ petition praying for the issue of an appropriate direction or order is maintainable before this Court?"

( 2 ) THE facts of the case, in brief; are as follow: (i) in W. P. No. 19860/86: The petitioner is a Medical Officer in the service of the Central Government in the department of Health. She has presented this writ petition on 13-11-1986 praying for the issue of a writ of mandamus directing the respondent to treat the service rendered by the petitioner on the establishment of the New Delhi Municipal Committee as the service rendered under the Central Government and to determine her seniority oh the said basis. (ii) Long prior to the presentation of the writ petition before this Court, the Act has come into force and a Central Administrative Tribunal has been constituted with effect from 1-11-1985 end a Bench of the Tribunal has also been established in the State of Karnataka. According to Section 14 of the act, the Central Administrative Tribunal has exclusive jurisdiction to adjudicate upon disputes and complaints in respect of service matters as also matters relating to recruitment of civil servants of the Union. Section 28 of the Act excludes the jurisdiction of all Courts except the supreme Court and of the Industrial Tribunai and Labour Court in respect of matters which fall within the jurisdiction of the Administrative Tribunal. Section 29 of the Act provides for transfer of all cases pending before any Court except the Supreme Court under Article 136 if the subject matter falls within the jurisdiction of the Tribunal. The petitioner, however, has presented this petition before this Court, in view, of Section 19 of the Act. it reads :"19. Applications to Tribunals- (1) subject to the other provisions of this - Act, a person aggrieved by any order pertaining to any matter within the jurisdiction of a Tribunal may make an application to the Tribunal for the redressol of his grievance. "the petitioner's plea is that as according to Section 19 of the Act, the jurisdiction of the Tribunal can ve invoked only if there was an order of the Central government or of any other authority, and as in the present case there was no order rejecting her request for fixing her seniority counting the service rendered by her in the service of the New Delhi municipal Committee, she has approached this Court. The contention of the petitioner is that if the tribunal has no jurisdiction to entertain an application in the absence of an order, this Court's jurisdiction is not excluded. (ii) In W. P. No. 20330/1984 : The petitioner is a civil servant of the State being a teacher in a high-school in the department of Public Instruction of the state Government. Originally, the petitioner was appointed on the establishment of a private high-school called nehru High School at Amruturin Kunigal taluk. The said institution was taken over by the Government. The petitioner made repeated representations before the authorities for fixing his seniority in the cadre of high-school teachers taking into account the service rendered by him on the establishment of the Nehru High- school before its take over by the Government. As no orders were passed, the petitioner has presented this writ petition on 21-12-1984 before this Court. (iv) During the pendency of this writ