NITYA NAND TIWARI Vs. STATE OF U P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) S. S. Sodhi, C. J. The contentions issue of the respective jurisdictions of the High Court at Allahabad and the Bench at Lucknow in terms of the United Provinces High Court (Amalgamation) Order, 1948 is what confronts us in this reference. This in turn brings into focus the judgment of the Supreme Court in Nasiruddin v. State Transport Appellate Tribunal, AIR 1976 SC 331, which had, until the judgment of the Division Bench of B. M. Lal and S. R. Singh, JJ. in Civil Misc. Writ Petition Nil of 1994, U. P. Rashtriya Chini Adhikari Parishad v. State of U. P. decided on September 27, 1994, been taken to have finally settled the controversy.

(2.) THE issue raised here arisen in the context of the order of the Vice Chairman of the Varanasi Development Authority of May, 30, 1994, suspend ing the appellant Nitya Nand Tewari, Assistant Town Planner, from service. In passing this order the Vice Chairman exercised the power delegated to him to do so by the Government Orders of November 10, 1986 and September 10, 1990.

(3.) ACCORDING to the learned single Jude "the cause of action for the petition has arisen at Varanasi and the mere submission that the delegation of power to the Vice Chairman is bad in law would not shift the cause of action from Allahabad to Lucknow Bench. The submission that delegation of power is bad in law if accepted may provide a ground for challenging the suspension order on the ground of jurisdiction but the cause of action having arisen at Varanasi, the petition should have been filed at Allahabad. "