JOSEPH ISSAC Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) W.P. (C) No. 6140 of 2010 is filed for the following reliefs:

(2.) Petitioner in the writ petition is a Dental Surgeon, Professor in Orthodontics, a member of Indian Dental Association and an elector to the Dental Council of India (for short 'DCI'), constituted by the Dentists Act, 1948, hereinafter referred to as "the Act". The Government of India issued a notification (Exhibit P-1) dated 15-2-2010, by which Respondents 4 to 7 in the writ petition were nominated to the DCI constituted under Section 3 of the Act. Section 3 of the Act specifies the composition of the DCI. An examination of the Section would indicate that some of the members are required to be nominated and some of the members are to be elected to the DCI, the details of which would be examined later. From the notification dated 15-2-2010, it appears that Respondents 4 to 7 were nominated under Clause (f) of Section 3 of the Act. It is this notification and more particularly the nomination of Respondents 5 and 7 which is challenged in the writ petition.

(3.) The learned Counsel appearing for the Respondents 5 to 7 raised a preliminary objection that this Court does not have the territorial jurisdiction to entertain the writ petition as no part of the cause of action arose within the territory or limits of this Court to exercise its jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution. According to the learned Counsel, since the impugned notification is issued by the Government of India and the nominations are made by the Government of India, New Delhi, the cause of action or the grievance of the Petitioner arose exclusively within the jurisdiction of the Delhi High Court and not of this Court.