MOHAN SINGH Vs. DIRECTOR GENERAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The learned Assistant Solicitor General of India raised a preliminary objection as to the maintainability of the writ petition, on the ground that the cause of action did not arise within the jurisdiction of this Court. Hence the preliminary issue was heard.

(2.) Petitioner is a Constable in Central Industrial Security Force (CISF) . He is challenging the orders passed against him in the departmental action. Ext P3 memo of charge was issued to him by the 5th respondent-the Assistant Commandant, CISF Unit, Vishakhapatnam Port Trust, while the petitioner was working in that unit. The petitioner submitted his reply to the 5 th respondent. The 5th respondent issued Ext.P5 order finalising the disciplinary action awarding 'censure'. Thereafter, the 4th respondent issued Ext.P4 show cause notice on 04.12015 in exercise of his power to review suo motu proposing to enhance the punishment of withholding of one increment for two years which will not have the effect of postponing of future increment in pay. Petitioner submitted Ext.P7 objection on 14.12015. But the 4th respondent issued Ext.P8 order on 06.01.2016 enhancing the penalty to withholding of one increment for one year. Petitioner submitted an appeal to the 3rd respondent-the DIG, CISF, at Chennai. He rejected it by Ext.P11 order dated 19.05.2016. Petitioner submitted a revision petition before the 2nd respondent-the Inspector General of CISF at Chennai. By Ext.P12 order dated 17.03.2017, the 2nd respondent rejected it.

(3.) Petitioner submits that he worked at Visakhapatnam from 06.08.2015 till 19.1.2016 and from 20.01.2016 to 17.02017 he was at Kayamkulam within the jurisdiction of this Court. Petitioner also states that he preferred appeal and revision to respondents 3 and 2 and they passed Exts.P11 and P12 orders while he was working in Kayamkulam within the territorial jurisdiction of this Court.