SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

2003 Supreme(Pat) 93

R.S.GARG, NAGENDRA RAI
Rameshwar Prasad – Appellant
Versus
Union Of India – Respondent


Judgment

1. This appeal is barred by limitation.

2. After hearing learned counsel for the parties and having perused the averments made in the limitation petition, we are of the view that sufficient grounds have been made out to condone the delay in filing the appeal. Accordingly the delay in filing the appeal is condoned.

3. Heard leamed counsel for the parties.

4. This appeal is directed against the order dated 28.1.2002 passed by the learned single Judge dismissing the writ application (C.W.J.C. No. 2365/2000) on the ground that this Court has no territorial jurisdiction to decide the controversy involved in the writ application.

5. The appellant-writ petitioner had filed the writ application for setting aside the order dated 6.4.1999 passed by the Appellate Authority, (the Directorate General, Border Security Force, New Delhi) affirming the order dated 20.5.1998 passed by the Commandant, 193 BN, Border Security Force dismissing the appellant-writ petitioner from the service. The said orders have been annexed as Annexures 10 & 9 respectively. The respondents raised the objection that as the petitioner was posted at Srinagar and the order of dismissal was passed at Sri Nagar as we


Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top