Disposed

Kuldeep Singh v. State of Rajasthan

Rajasthan HC15 May 2023CW/677/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Court held that the Principal Seat at Jodhpur lacks territorial jurisdiction to entertain a writ petition where the cause of action arose in a district under the Jaipur Bench, referencing Supreme Court precedent on territorial jurisdiction.

What did the court decide?

The registry is directed to return the entire record of the case to the petitioner for presentation before the Jaipur Bench.

Kuldeep Singh Vs State of Rajasthan — Civil Procedure and Limitation | Rajasthan HC (2023)

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN JODHPUR

¶2

S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 677/2023

¶3

Kuldeep Singh

¶4

----Petitioner

¶5

	Versus
State of Rajasthan & Ors.	----Respondents
For Petitioner(s) :	Mr. Manvendra Singh
For Respondent(s) :	Nonepresent

¶6

HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE REKHA BORANA

¶7

Order

¶8

15/05/2023

¶9

On the last occasion a preliminary objection was raised by learned counsel for the respondents that the present writ petition relates to the jurisdiction of Jaipur Bench and therefore, cannot be entertained at Jodhpur.

¶10

A perusal of the cause title itself and the subject matter makes it clear that the petitioner is working as District Coordinator at Baran. Whatever cause arose in the instant matter, pertains to the territorial jurisdiction of Jaipur. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Rajasthan High Court Advocates' Association Vs. Union of India & Ors. ; (2001) 2 SCC 294, held as under:

¶11

"The purpose of the Presidential Order is to carve out and define territorial jurisdiction between the principal seat at Jodhpur and the permanent Bench seat at Jaipur. The cases are to be heard accordingly, unless the Chief Justice may exercise in his discretion the power vested in him by the proviso to Para 2 of the Presidential Order. Clauses(1) and (2) of Article 226 of the Constitution provide how territorial jurisdiction shall be exercised by any High Court. Although the said clauses do not

¶12

[CW-677/2023]

¶13

(2 of 2)

¶14

deal with principal seat or permanent Bench of any High Court but in our opinion, there is no reason why the principle underlying thereunder cannot be applied to the functioning of the bifurcated territorial jurisdiction between the Principal Seat and permanent Bench seat of any High Court. In case of a dispute arising whether an individual case or cases should be filed and heard at Jodhpur or Jaipur, the same has to be found out by applying the test – from which district the case arises, that is, in which district the cause of action can be said to have arisen and then exercising the jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution."

¶15

The present one is a fresh matter and no reply has been preferred on behalf of the respondents till date.

¶16

In view of the above, this Court is of the considered opinion that the Principal Seat of the Rajasthan High Court is not having any territorial jurisdiction to entertain this petition for writ without having a specific order in this regard by Hon'ble the Chief Justice. 5. The Registry, thus, is directed to return the entire record of the case to learned counsel for the petitioner for proper presentation of the writ petition before the Jaipur Bench of this Court.

¶17

(REKHA BORANA),J

¶18

19-Sachin/-

Kuldeep Singh v. State of Rajasthan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Kuldeep Singh v. State of Rajasthan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Hariram Vs Lrs of Balu Ram

Sanwarmal Vs Trilok Chand

Rankeshwar Rawal Vs State of Rajasthan

Shambhu Singh Rajpurohit Vs Leena Rajpurohit

Gulshan Kumar Vs Smt.Gyan Devi

Arjun Lal Vs Santramdas Geharimal Jewelers Pvt. Ltd.