Kamal vs Union Of India
2022 Latest Caselaw 308 MP

             HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH,
                          W.P.No.185/2022
                 (Kamal Vs. Union of India and others)
                                  (1)


Jabalpur, dated : 06.01.2022

      Shri Shiv Shankar Tripathi, Advocate for the petitioner.
      Shri   J.K.Jain,   Assistant      Solicitor   General   for   the
respondents/State.

Heard on the question of admission.

By way of this petition, under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner has assailed the medical reports dated 23.10.2021, annexure P/1 and 25.10.2021, annexure P/2, and has sought a direction to the respondents authorities to appoint the petitioner on the post of Sub Inspector in Delhi Police, CAPSs and Assistant Sub Inspector in CISF in terms of the recruitment notice, annexure P/3.

Shri J.K.Jain, learned Assistant Solicitor General appearing for the Union of India raised a preliminary objection with regard to territorial jurisdiction to entertain this petition before this Bench inasmuch as the impugned medical reports, annexures P/1 and P/2, have been issued from Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh and the petitioner is a resident of District Mandsaur. Office of none of the respondents are situated in the State of M.P. However, at this stage, learned counsel for the petitioner by filing I.A.No.83/2022 relied upon the judgment passed by the Division Bench of this Court in W.P.No.25938/2021 to contend that in an identical matter the Division Bench had overruled the objection with regard to the territorial jurisdiction.

On perusal of the order dated 15.12.2021 passed in W.P.No.25938/2021 the Division Bench overruled the objection in view of the fact that the medical examination of the petitioner was done in the State of M.P. In the instant case, admittedly the medical examination according to annexures P/1 and P/2 was conducted in Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh. The petitioner is resident of District Mandsaur and office of none of the respondents are situated in the State of M.P.

HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH, W.P.No.185/2022 (Kamal Vs. Union of India and others)

This Court finds force in the submissions of learned counsel for the respondents. Accordingly, this Court has no territorial jurisdiction to entertain this writ petition. Accordingly, the same is dismissed for want of jurisdiction. However, the petitioner would be liberty to approach the appropriate Forum having jurisdiction for redressal of his grievance.

(S.A.Dharmadhikari) Judge HS

HEMANT SARAF 2022.01.08 17:12:47 +05'30'