Back
M. V. MURALIDARAN
Dilip Biswas – Appellant
Versus
Union of India – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
M.V. Muralidaran, J.:
Heard learned counsel for the petitioner; learned Deputy Solicitor General of India for the respondent Union of India and learned Additional Government Pleader for the respondent State.
2. This writ petition has been filed by the petitioner to set aside the impugned order passed by the Commandant 142 Bn BSF, Jalipa, Harmet (Rajasthan) dated 2.3.2022 thereby ordering to retire the petitioner from service with admissible pensionary benefits, if any, which was affirmed by the Inspector General, FTR HQ (SPL OPS) BSF, Odisha dated 7.6.2023.
3. When the writ petition was taken up for hearing on 8.1.2024, the learned Deputy Solicitor General has challenged the maintainability of the writ petition before the Calcutta High Court on the ground that as against the order passed by the Commandant, 142 Bn, Rajasthan dated 2.3.2022, the present writ petition has been filed before this Court.
4. In reply, the learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that since the petitioner is residing within the jurisdiction of this Court, the writ petition is very well maintainable before this Court though the original order was passed in Rajasthan. The learned counsel further su
The main legal point established in the judgment is the requirement to establish territorial jurisdiction for maintaining a writ petition, based on the principles of cause of action and the location ....
Territorial jurisdiction of the court is determined based on the material, essential, or integral part of the cause of action, and consent cannot confer jurisdiction upon the court.
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the mere communication of correspondence and orders does not give rise to a cause of action within the territorial jurisdiction of the court.
Point of Law : Territorial jurisdiction - Prior to Constitutional (Fifteenth Amendment Act, 1963, concept of cause of action was alien for adjudication of disputes by High Court under Article 226 of ....
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the High Court can exercise its writ jurisdiction if any part of the cause of action arises within its territorial jurisdiction, as defined in....
Territorial jurisdiction is determined by the place where the order is made and where the consequences fall on the person concerned. Forum conveniences should be considered, especially for retired em....
A termination order issued during a probation period, without any misconduct or disciplinary proceedings, is not stigmatic or punitive and does not require a regular inquiry or a reasonable opportuni....
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the cause of action must arise within the territorial jurisdiction of the High Court for the exercise of power under Article 226 of the Consti....
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
