The petitioner sought a direction to reconsider a removal order passed by the CRPF Commandant in Chennai and affirmed by the Director General in New Delhi. The court held it lacked jurisdiction as no part of the cause of action arose within Kerala.
Direction to the 1st respondent to reconsider the removal order was denied due to lack of jurisdiction.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT:
THE HONOURABLE SMT. JUSTICE P.V.ASHA
FRIDAY, THE 6TH DAY OF APRIL 2018 / 16TH CHAITHRA, 1940
WP(C).No. 7339 of 2018
PETITIONER :
JOBIMON G., AGED 35 YEARS, S/O GEORGE, JOBIN VILLA, KUNDAMAM, KURAVARA, OTTASEKHARAMANGALAM P.O., TRIVANDRUM.
BY ADV.SRI.M.R.SASITH
RESPONDENTS :
1. UNION OF INDIA, REPRESENTED BY SECRETARY, MINISTRY OF HOME AFFAIRS, NORTH BLOCK, CABINET SECRETARIAT, RAISIANA HILLS, NEW DELHI.
2. DIRECTORATE GENERAL-CRPF, BLOCK NO.1, CGO COMPLEX, LODHI ROAD, NEW DELHI- 11003.
3. THE COMMANDANT, 77 BN, CRPF, POONAMALLEE, CHENNAI.
BY SRI.N.NAGARESH, ASSISTANT SOLICITOR GENERAL SRI.SUVIN R.MENON, CGC
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 06-04-2018, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
EL
WP(C).No. 7339 of 2018 (N)
PETITIONER(S)' EXHIBITS
EXHIBITP1 THE TRUE COPY OF THE MEMO ISSUED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT TO THE PETITIONER EXHIBIT P2 THE TRUE COPY OF THE REPLY ISSUED BY THE PETITIONER ON 22-03-14 TO 3RD RESPONDENT EXHIBIT P3 THE TRUE COPY OF THE REVISION PETITION FILED BY THE PETITIONER ON 14-06-17 BEFORE THE 1ST RESPONDENT
RESPONDENT(S)' EXHIBITS
NIL TRUE COPY P.S TO JUDGE
EL
P.V.ASHA J.
------------------------------------W.P.(C).No.7339 of 2018
------------------------------------- Dated this the 6th day of April, 2018
JUDGMENT
The petitioner is seeking a direction to the 1st respondent to consider his representation against the order of removal passed by the 3rd respondent at Chennai and which was affirmed in appeal by the Director General at New Delhi.
submits that there is no provision for a revision. Even otherwise, the cause of action arose outside the jurisdiction of this Court as the petitioner was working at Chennai and neither the punishment nor the appeal upholding it were awarded/issued by any of the officers within Kerala.
In the above circumstances, this Court does
W.P.(C).No.7339 of 2018
not have any jurisdiction to entertain the writ petition as no part of cause of action arose within the jurisdiction of this Court as held by me in W.P. (C) No.37793/2017.
Accordingly, this writ petition is
dismissed.
Sd/-
P.V.ASHA, JUDGE.
ww
2 issues framed by the court
Whether this Court has jurisdiction to entertain a writ petition seeking direction to reconsider a removal order passed outside Kerala.
Whether the cause of action arose within the territorial jurisdiction of this Court.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
W.P. (C) No.37793/2017Referred¶32
Jobimon G.
Union of India, represented by Secretary, Ministry of Home Affairs
Directorate General-CRPF
The Commandant, 77 BN, CRPF
P.V. Asha
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
