AMIT KUMAR vs UNION OF INDIA AND ORS

Judgment text excerpt

$~32 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of decision: 10.01.2025 + W.P.(C) 230/2025 & CM APPL. 1131/2025, CM APPL. 1132/2025 AMIT KUMAR .....Petitioner Through: Mr.Sahil Mongia, Ms.Sanjana Samor, Mr.Yash Yadav, Adv. versus UNION OF INDIA AND ORS .....Respondents Through: Mr.Sahil Munjal, SPC with Ms.Rhea Gandhi, Advs. with Mr.Siatul, CISF with Mr.Prahlad Kaushik, SI, CISF with Mr.S.N.Chaudhary, DC, CISF. Ms.Shagun Shahi, Ms.Meera Chugh, Advs. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NAVIN CHAWLA HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAVINDER DUDEJA NAVIN CHAWLA, J. (ORAL) 1. This petition has been filed by the petitioner, challenging the impugned letter dated 23.12.2024 issued by the respondent no.3, informing the petitioner that the petitioner has been declared “unsuitable for employment in the CISF”. 2. The Impugned Order dated 23.12.2024 has been issued by the Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed W.P.(C) 230/2025 Page 1 of 3 By:SUNIL Signing Date:14.01.2025 20:07:52 Commandant, CISF. RTC Arakkonam, District Ranipet, State of Tamil Nadu. The petitioner himself is a resident of the State of Bihar. We, therefore, enquired from the petitioner as to why this petition has been filed before this Court. He submits that the petition has been filed before this Court as the office of the Director General, CISF and the Ministry of Home Affair is situated at Delhi. 3. Apart from the fact that the Impugned Order dismissing the petitioner from service has not been issued at Delhi, it is trite law that “cause of action” means a bundle of facts which is necessary for the petitioner to prove in order to succeed in the proceedings. It does not completely depend upon a character of the relief prayed for by the petitioner. A small part of the cause of action arising within the territorial jurisdiction of