Vikas Prajapat v. Union of India

1. This writ petition is directed against an order passed by the Central Administrative Tribunal, Chandigarh.

2. It is clear that this Court has no territorial jurisdiction to entertain this writ petition.

3. The only ground for this Court to entertain the writ petition is that the petitioner lives in or around Delhi. This cannot constitute the basis for this Court to entertain this writ petition either under sub- Article (1) or (2) of Article 2261 of the Constitution of India.

226. Power of High Courts to issue certain writs. – (1) Notwithstanding anything in Article 32, every High Court shall have power, throughout W.P.(C) 17470/2024

4. We do not appreciate the fact that this writ petition has been filed in Delhi, thereby further burdening a clogged docket. However, as we are not entertaining the writ petition, we refrain from imposing costs.

5. The writ petition is dismissed for want of territorial jurisdiction.

C. HARI SHANKAR, J.

ANOOP KUMAR MENDIRATTA, J. DECEMBER 18, 2024 dsn Click here to check corrigendum, if any the territories in relation to which it exercises jurisdiction, to issue to any person or authority, including in appropriate cases, any Government, within those territories directions, orders or writs, including writs in the nature of habeas corpus, mandamus, prohibition, quo warranto and certiorari, or any of them, for the enforcement of any of the rights conferred by Part III and for any other purpose. (2) The power conferred by clause (1) to issue directions, orders or writs to any Government, authority or person may also be exercised by any High Court exercising jurisdiction in relation to the territories within which the cause of action, wholly or in part, arises for the exercise of such power, notwithstanding that the seat of such Government or authority or the residence of such person is not within those territories.