N K DHANRAJ Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner, a Soldier in the Indian Army, was awarded the punishment of 'service reprimand' under Section 40(a) of the Army Act, 1950. The order was passed on February 1, 1992. A few months later, the Commanding Officer ordered that 'severe reprimand' shall be deemed to have been awarded under Section 63. Any entry was accordingly made in the petitioner's service book. However, the order passed by the Commanding Officer was directed to be cancelled and on July 14, 1993, the original order of February 1, 1992 was restored. The petitioner filed a statutory complaint "for mitigation of punishment "to the Chief of the Army Staff. This complaint was recommended by the Commanding Officer "keeping in view the good conduct, hard work and future career, of the petitioner. However, the Chief of the Army staff rejected the statutory complaint on December 7, 1995. The petitioner submitted various representations thereafter. Having got no reply, the petitioner approached the High Court of Madhya Pradesh through a petition under Article 226 of the Constitution, viz Civil Writ Petition No. 587 of 1997. The respondents did not file any reply on merits. However, a preliminary objection regarding the maintainability of the petition on the ground of 'territorial jurisdiction' was raised. Vide order dated February 12, 1997, the High Court of Madhya Pradesh held that "as no cause of action ever accrued within the territorial jurisdiction of this Court, the petition has to be dismissed on this short ground". Hence this petition.

(2.) Notice of this petition was issued to the respondents. They put in appearance on July 15, 1998. Inspite of grant of two opportunities, no reply has been filed. The facts as averred in the petition have not been controverted.

(3.) We have heard the learned counsel for the parties.