Krishna Kanhaiya v. The Union Of India And ORS

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.1355 of 2015 ====================================================== Krishna Kanhaiya Son of Late Ramavatar Ram Resident of villagePanchmahala, P.O.- Mokama Ghat, P.S- Mokama, District- Patna. .... .... Petitioner/s

Versus

1. The Union of India through Director General of Police, Central Reserve Police Force, Govt. of India, New Delhi.

2. That Director General of Police, Central Reserve Police Force, Govt. of India, New Delhi.

3. The Special Director General of Police, North-East Zone, Central Reserve Police Force, Guwahati, Assam.

4. The Additional Director General of Police Force, Guwahati, Assam.

5. The Inspector General of Police North- East Zone, Central Reserve Police Force, Shillong, Meghalaya.

6. The Deputy Inspector General of Police C.R.P.F. North- East, Khatkhati, Assam.

7. The Commandant 36 B.N., Central Reserve Police Force Khunsa, District- Tirap, Arunachal Pradesh.

8. The Inquiry Officer-cum-Deputy Commandant 36 Batallion, C.R.P.F. Khunsa, District- Tirap, Arunachal Pradesh.

.... .... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Arun Kumar Arun, Adv For the Respondent/s : Mr. Sanjay Kumar(ASG) ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MIHIR KUMAR JHA ORAL JUDGMENT 23-02-2015 Heard learned counsel for the parties.

Having regard to the fact that the departmental proceeding was initiated and conducted in the State of Arunachal Pradesh and the petitioner having participated in the same was also dismissed from service by an order passed by the competent authority in the State of Arunachal Pradesh, the remedy for him even after rejection of his appeal by the authority at

Patna High Court CWJC No.1355 of 2015 (2) dt.23-02-2015 Assam, to assail the order of punishment as affirmed by the appellate authority only before the Court which has the territorial jurisdiction.

As a matter of fact, learned Assistant Solicitor General points out that even the revision application filed by the petitioner was rejected by the revisional authority at Shillong and therefore, none of the orders have been passed by any authority within the territorial jurisdiction of this State.

Faced with this situation, learned counsel for the petitioner seeks permission to withdraw this application in order to enable the petitioner to move the competent authority for assailing the aforementioned orders of punishment as affirmed by the appellate and revisional authority before appropriate Court.

That being so, this application is permitted to be withdrawn with the aforementioned liberty.

(Mihir Kumar Jha, J) Ranjan/- U