MANJESH Vs. UNION OF INDIA AND ORS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner, who was working as Mahila Constable in the Central Industrial Security Force, Nuclear Fuel Complex, Hyderabad, has sought the quashing of the order dated 14th July, 2009 passed by the Commandant, CISF Unit NFC Hyderabad by which her services have been terminated with effect from the date of receipt of the order under the proviso to Rule 25(2) of the Central Industrial Security Force Rules, 2001. The petitioner has also sought the quashing of the order dated 13th September, 2009 passed by the Inspector General, Western Sector, CISF, Navi Mumbai by which the representation dated 18th August, 2009 filed by the petitioner against the aforesaid order dated 14th July, 2009 has been rejected. The petitioner has also sought the quashing of the order dated 9th October, 2009 by which the representation dated 20th August, 2009 filed by the petitioner before the Assistant Director General, New Delhi has been rejected.

(2.) A preliminary objection has been raised by learned Counsel appearing for the respondents that this Court will not have the jurisdiction to entertain this petition as cause of action or even part of cause of action has not been arisen within the territorial jurisdiction of this Court and in support of this contention he has placed reliance upon the Full Bench decision of this Court in Rajendra Kumar Mishra v. Union of India and Ors.,2004 1 UPLBEC 108 and the Division Bench judgment of this Court in Deeptiman Logistics Pvt. Ltd. and Anr. v. Union of India and Ors., 2010 4 ADJ 148 .

(3.) Learned Counsel for the petitioner, however, submitted that part of cause of action had arisen within the territorial jurisdiction of this Court as the orders dated 14th July, 2009, 13th September, 2009, 9th October, 2009 and 7th April, 2010 were received by the petitioner by post at District Auraiya and the appeal and the revision petition were sent by the petitioner from Auraiya and orders of rejection were received at Auraiya and so this Court will have the jurisdiction to entertain the petition and in support of his contention he has placed reliance upon the judgments of this Court in Phool Singh Chauhan v. Chief of the Army Staff, New Delhi and Ors., 2008 1 ESC 423 and Vinod Kumar Pandey v. Union of India and Ors., 2009 1 UPLBEC 200.