Dismissed

V.Shanmugam v. The Director General of Bsf

Madras HC17 Sept 2019WP/5653/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioner seeking release of insurance amount approached Madras High Court under Article 226. Court held lack of territorial jurisdiction as petitioner employed in Tripura and ordered withdrawal with liberty to approach jurisdictional High Court.

What did the court decide?

Writ petition dismissed as withdrawn with liberty to approach the jurisdictional High Court for the relief sought. No costs.

V.Shanmugam Vs The Director General of Bsf — Service and Employment | Madras HC (2019)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶2

DATED : 17.09.2019

¶3

CORAM

¶4

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE P.D. AUDIKESAVALU

¶5

W.P. No. 5653 of 2019

¶6

V. Shanmugam ... Petitioner
-vs-
1.The Director General of BSF,
Border Security Force,
Grievance Cell (ADM Duty),
Block No. 10, CGO Complex,
Lodhi Road,
New Delhi 110 003.
2.The Deputy Inspector General
Border Security Force,
Sector TAC Head Quarters,
Post Tamasa,
District Malkangiri,
Odisa.
3.The Commandant,
110 Betalian,
Border Security Force,
Panbari Post,
Alamganj,
Dhupri, Assam.
4.The Commandant,
118, Bettalian,
Border Security Force,
Jalalapad Post,
Punjab 152 024. ... Respondents

¶7

Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying to issue a Writ of Mandamus, directing the First Respondent to consider representation dated 05.02.2018 by releasing the insurance amount to the Petitioner.

¶8

For Petitioner : Mr. S. Nagarajan

¶9

For Respondents: Mr. R. Rajesh Vivekananthan, Central Government Standing Counsel

¶10

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

¶11

O R D E R

¶12

When it was pointed out that neither any part of the cause of action has arisen nor the seat of authority of any of the Respondents, is situated within the territorial limits of jurisdiction of this Court and as the Petitioner is employed at Tripura State, he will have to approach the jurisdictional High Court where the office of the employer is located, Learned Counsel for the Petitioner seeks permission of this Court to withdraw the Writ Petition with liberty to approach the jurisdictional High Court for the relief sought in this Writ Petition and he has made an endorsement to that effect, which is recorded.

¶13

Accordingly, the Writ Petition is dismissed as
withdrawn granting such liberty. No costs.
Sd/-
Assistant Registrar(CS-III)
//True copy//
Sub Assistant Registrar
gsa
To
1.The Director General of BSF,
Border Security Force,
Grievance Cell (ADM Duty),
Block No. 10, CGO Complex,
Lodhi Road,
New Delhi 110 003.
2.The Deputy Inspector General
Border Security Force,
Sector TAC Head Quarters,
Post Tamasa,
District Malkangiri,
Odisa.
3.The Commandant,
110 Betalian,
Border Security Force,
Panbari Post,
Alamganj,
Dhupri, Assam.

¶14

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

¶15

4.The Commandant, 118, Bettalian, Border Security Force, Jalalapad Post, Punjab 152 024.

¶16

+1cc to Mr.S. Nagarajan, Advocate SR.No.79968

¶17

+1cc to Mr.R. Rajesh Vivekananthan, Advocate SR.No.79637

¶18

W.P. No. 5653 of 2019
PM(CO)
GMY(04/11/2019)

¶19

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

V.Shanmugam v. The Director General of Bsf

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

V.Shanmugam v. The Director General of Bsf

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

M/s.Kutty Flush Doors Vs Tamil Nadu State Marketing

Mrs.Nalayani, Vs The Union of India

Daivasigamani Vs Hindu Religious & Charitable

Umarani Vs The State Bank of INdia

K.Ahilan Vs Territory Co-ordinator (Retail)

K.Ahilan Vs Trichy Retail Regional Office