IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI W.P.(S) No. 175 of 2022 -----

Khalid Ahmed, aged about 37 years, son of Abdul Hafiz, resident of House No. 69, Khan Road, Khirgaon, Hazaribagh, P.O. Hazaribagh Sadar, P.S.

Sadar Thana, District-Hazaribagh.

… … Petitioner Versus

1. The Punjab National Bank, through its Chairman, Office situated at- 7 Bhikajikama Place, Africa Avenue, New Delhi, P.O, P.S & Dist- New Delhi

2. The General Manager, Personnel, Punjab National Bank, through its Chairman, Office situated at-7 Bhikajikama Place, Africa Avenue, New Delhi, P.O, P.S & Dist- New Delhi.

3. The Deputy General Manager-cum- Disciplinary Authority, Punjab National Bank, Zonal Office, Office situated at- PNB House, Ground Floor, 18A, Brabourne Road, Kolkata, P.O, P.S & Dist- Kolkata.

… … Respondents ----

CORAM : SRI ANANDA SEN, J.

----

For the Petitioner: Mr. Binod Singh, Advocate For the Respondents: Mr. Pratyush Kumar, Advocate Mr. V. Chaturvedi, Advocate ----

O R D E R RESERVED On: 10.02.2026 Pronounced On 17.02.2026 This case was taken up on 10.02.2026.

2. A preliminary objection has been raised regarding the maintainability of this writ petition before this Court on the ground of territorial jurisdiction. Counsel for both the parties argued at length on the point of maintainability. Upon conclusion of this arguments, Order was reserved.

3. The brief facts of the case are that while the petitioner was posted as Circle Officer at Burdwan, West Bengal, he was served a departmental chargesheet on 19.04.2018.The charges were related to alleged misconduct, concerning loan sanctions based on allegedly forged documents. These overt acts were committed in West Bengal. Departmental enquiry was conducted between August to November 2018 in West Bengal. The Disciplinary Authority at PNB Zonal Office, Kolkata issued an order of termination from service on 12.02.2019. He filed an appeal before the Appellate Authority through speed post from Hazaribagh. The appeal was rejected by the Appellate Authority on 26.11.2019. The petitioner has come to this Court challenging the aforesaid orders.

4. Learned counsel for the respondents raised a preliminary objection regarding maintainability of this writ petition on the ground of territorial jurisdiction of this Court. He submitted that no part of the cause of action arose within the territorial jurisdiction of this Court. The overtact of misconduct was at West Bengal. The disciplinary proceedings, including the issuance of chargesheet, the enquiry was conducted outside the territorial jurisdiction of this Court, i.e., West Bengal. Further, the Disciplinary Authority and Appellate Authorities who have passed the impugned orders are stationed outside the territorial jurisdiction of this Court. Thus, he submitted that the writ petition is not maintainable on the ground of lack of territorial jurisdiction.

5. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is a local resident of Hazaribagh, which falls within the Territorial Jurisdiction of this Court. He further submitted that the petitioner has filed the appeal through a speed post against the order of termination of his services from Hazaribagh to Punjab National Bank, Head Office, Delhi which was rejected by the Appellate Authority on 26.11.2019 and communication was sent at Hazaribagh. He admits that the act, which constitute the misconduct, was committed in West Bengal, Departmental Proceeding was initiated in West Bengal, dismissal order was also passed in West Bengal. Even the appellate order was passed at New Delhi, beyond the territorial jurisdiction of this Court, but since the memo of appeal was sent by Speed Post from Hazaribagh, part of the cause of action arose within the jurisdiction of this Court. Thus, he argued that the present writ petition is maintainable before this Court.

6. I find that only on the basis of communication from Hazaribagh the petitioner is invoking the jurisdiction of this Court under Article 226(2) of the consti