JAI NARAIN KUSHWAHA Vs. STATE OF U P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD Sri P.K.Khare, learned counsel for the appellant and Sri Shyamlal Dhanurdhari appearing for the respondents. The appellant challenged the order dated 14.2.1997, passed by the Chief Engineer in compliance with the order passed in writ petition no. 40488/96 in the writ petition. The learned Single Judge found that the matter relates to Jhansi and, therefore, this Court sitting at Lucknow as well as at Allahabad, both have jurisdiction and further observed that it is the case of the appellant that Chief Engineer wrongly interpreted the order passed by this Court at Allahabad and passed the impugned order promoting the respondent no. 4 on higher post, which was being held by the appellant. However, as the impugned order was passed on the basis of the order passed in Writ Petition No. 40488/96 at Allahabad, therefore, the order under appeal was passed directing that the petition be returned to the appellant for presentation before this Court sitting at Allahabad. In view of the own finding recorded by the learned Single Judge that the matter is cognizable by this Court, both at Allahabad and Lucknow, the appellant could not have been refused hearing at Lucknow, merely because he wanted to challenge an order, passed in compliance with the order passed in a writ petition at Allahabad. It is the cause of action, which arises at a particular place, wholly or in part, that determines the territorial jurisdiction of this Court. Once a finding has been recorded that this Court has jurisdiction, both at Allahabad as well as Lucknow, it was the choice of the litigant to choose the forum. The order under appeal is, therefore, liable to be set aside. Accordingly, the appeal is allowed and the order under appeal is set aside. The writ petition is restored to its original number and shall be listed before the Bench having jurisdiction to decide the same on merit immediately after summer vacations.