RAJESH K K Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner is mentally unsound and is therefore represented by his father, as his next friend and guardian. The petitioner had joined the Assam Rifles in February, 2003. At that time he was mentally and medically fit. He was holding the rank of Rifleman/General Duty (RFN/GD). According to the petitioner on account of the extreme adverse service conditions the petitioner developed depression and psychotic disorder and he was medically boarded out with effect from 5-8-2009, The complaint of the petitioner is that though he was boarded out assessing his disability at 100% his claim for disability pension was rejected by the respondents on the ground that the disease Schizophrenia is not covered by the relevant rule. The petitioner has therefore filed this writ petition challenging the action of the respondents and seeking the issue of appropriate directions for the sanction of disability pension to him. The learned Assistant Solicitor General of India has raised a preliminary objection that this Court does not have the territorial jurisdiction to entertain this writ petition. According to the Assistant Solicitor General, this writ petition is not maintainable before this Court and has to be filed before the court having jurisdiction over the second respondent.

(2.) In view of the above objection, the question of maintainability has been heard by me. The counsel for the petitioner submits that as soon as the petitioner was boarded out, the petitioner had returned to his native place which is within the territorial jurisdiction of this Court. It is from his native place that he had submitted an application for the grant of disability pension to the petitioner. Though the same has been rejected by the second respondent, it is contended that a copy of the order was received by the petitioner through post at his native place. Since the petitioner is residing at Kannur, it is contended that this Court has jurisdiction.

(3.) The learned Assistant Solicitor General on the other hand contends that the petitioner's service was under the second respondent, the alleged disability suffered by him was while working at Assam under the second respondent and he was boarded out on account of his disability at Assam. His claim for disability pension was also considered by the second respondent who is at Assam and therefore no part of the cause of action has arisen within the territorial jurisdiction of this Court. According to the counsel, the present case is covered by the decision in Lt. Col. Mahender Singh Yadav v. Union of India,2008 4 KHC 916 .