HAVALDAR OM PRAKASH v. UNION OF INDIA & OTHERS

Delhi High Court · 16 Apr 2010 · 2010:DHC:11287-DB
HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE GITA MITTAL -); HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE INDERMEET KAUR; ORDER r.6.04.2010
2010:DHC:11287-DB
administrative appeal_dismissed

AI Summary

The Delhi High Court dismissed a writ petition for lack of territorial jurisdiction where all relevant acts occurred outside its jurisdiction, allowing respondents to consider the petitioner's representations in accordance with law.

Full Text
Translation output
\ HIGH COURT OF DELHI W.P.(C) No.25t.0l20L0 & CM Nos. 5038-5039/2010
HAVALDAR OM PRAKASH ...,. Petitioner
Through Mr, Sukhbir Singh, Adv. VCTSUS UNION OF INDIA & OTHERS ..... Respondents
Through Mr. A.K. Bhardwaj, Adv.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE GITA MITTAL -)
HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE INDERMEET KAUR
ORDER r.6.04.2010
JUDGMENT

1. The petitioner is aggrieved by certain actions and orders passed by respondent nos. 3 and 4 who are based in the CRPF Group Centre, Neemach (M.P.). The actions attributed to the petitioner in respect of which these orders were passed have also occurred at the petitioner's posting at Neemach (M.P.). No part of the cause of action giving rise to the filing of the present writ petition has arisen within the jurisdiction of this court. | 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that certain representations made by him to respondent no. 2 have not been forwarded by the respondent nos. 3 and 4. ln our view, such grievance could also have been addressed in appropriate proceedings which could have been filed in Madhya Pradesh within whose jurisdiction the acts and )F Vo W.P.(C) No. 2570/2070 page 7 of[2] 2010:DHC:11287-DB omissions attributed to respondent nos, 3 and 4 have taken place. For the above reason, we are not inclined to entertain this petition on grounds of want of territorial jurisdiction. This writ petition and applications are dismissed in the above terms. We make it clear that we have not expressed any opinion on the merits of the petitioner's grievance. lt shall be open to the petitioner to lay his challenge in a court of competent jurisdiction in accordance with law.

3. At this stage,. a prayer is made by learned counsel for the petitioner that the representations of the petitioner which have been enclosed with the writ petition may be examined by the respondent no. 2. Mr. Bhardwaj,, L< learned counsel appearing for the respondents submits that the respondents would have no objection to examination thereof in accordance with law' However, the same are non-statutory and examination thereof would not give rise to any cause of action in favour or against the petitioner within the jurisdiction of this court. This statement on behalf of the respondents is accepted. lt shall be open to the respondents to consider the representations made by the petitioner and to take action thereon if deemed fit and proper in accordance with law. Dasti ETA[4] EET KAUR, J APRTL 16, zot O kr W.P.(C) No' writ i