Petitioner contends that his regulatory and constitutional rights were violated in that his Superintendent's hearing was commenced less then 24 hours after he met with his inmate assistant, he was denied a witness and he was not provided a written denial form as to that witness. Petitioner, having failed to raise these issues in his administrative appeal, has failed to exhaust available administrative remedies (see, Matter of Ruiz v Coughlin, 184 A.D.2d 818; Matter of Gonzales v Coughlin, 180 A.D.2d 974). In addition, petitioner failed to object to these alleged violations at the time of the hearing when they could have been corrected, and is consequently prohibited from raising these issues in this Court (see, Matter of Gonzales v Coughlin, supra; see also, Matter of Satchell v Coughlin, 178 A.D.2d 795). Finally, in this context, petitioner's constitutional claims do not justify a departure from the general rule requiring exhaustion of administrative remedies (see, Matter of Bates v Coughlin, 145 A.D.2d 854, lv denied 74 N.Y.2d 602; Matter of Beyah v Scully, 143 A.D.2d 903; cf., Matter of Dozier v New York City, 130 A.D.2d 128, 134-135).
Weiss, P.J., Levine, Mercure, Mahoney and Casey, JJ., concur. Ordered that the judgment is affirmed, without costs.