Home Case Index All Cases Indian Laws Indian Laws + HC Indian Laws - 2016 (12) TMI HC This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2016 (12) TMI 1768 - HC - Indian LawsTerritorial Jurisdiction - Termination of contractual services with the respondent no.2 - non-service of termination order to petitioner - whether merely because the Government of India has issued its letter dated 27.10.2015 at Delhi would this ipso facto give territorial jurisdiction to this Court although this letter has not been communicated to the petitioner at Delhi and has in fact been communicated to the petitioner at Goa in terms of the subsequent letter dated 28.10.2015? - Held that:- A Constitution Bench of the Supreme Court way back in the year 1963 in the judgment in the case of Bachhittar Singh Vs. The State of Punjab [1962 (3) TMI 84 - SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] has held that orders passed in Government files unless communicated would not give a legal right to a person. The ratio of the judgment of the Supreme Court in the case of Bachhittar Singh has been consistently followed thereafter and it is the law of the land. A cause of action in law means that an enforceable right in law accrues. When a right accrues simultaneously a liability also arises against a person. If an enforceable right arises only on communication of the order, then, a cause of action arises and is complete only when the communication of the order to the person concerned is complete. Without such communication of an order to the concerned person, the cause of action is not complete for filing of a case in a court of law. This Court has no territorial jurisdiction and the writ petition is therefore dismissed
|