Patna High Court
Manoj Kumar SinghversusThe Union Of India and Ors
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
Holding
The Patna High Court held that the writ petition is not maintainable because the cause of action arose entirely in Gujarat, and service of the order in Bihar does not confer territorial jurisdiction.
Summary
Manoj Kumar Singh, a Border Security Force employee posted in Gujarat, filed a writ petition in the Patna High Court seeking quash of his dismissal order and reinstatement. The Union of India contended that the petition was non‑maintainable as the cause of action arose in Gujarat, and service of the order in Bihar did not confer territorial jurisdiction. The court examined the argument and a prior coordinate‑bench decision (CWJC No. 9289 of 2022) on the same issue. It concluded that the substantive cause of action was wholly within Gujarat and therefore the Patna High Court lacked jurisdiction. Consequently, the petition was dismissed, with liberty granted to the petitioner to approach the appropriate court in Gujarat within three months.
Issues considered
- Whether the Patna High Court has territorial jurisdiction to entertain the writ petition filed by a BSF employee whose dismissal order was passed in Gujarat but served in Bihar.
Subjects
- territorial jurisdiction
- writ petition
- service of notice
- reinstatement
- Border Security Force
- high court
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.19632 of 2013
======================================================
Manoj Kumar Singh Son Of Sri Deep Narayan Singh Resident Of Village -
Akhtiyarpur, P.S. - Mahnar, District - Vaishali
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The Union of India through Secretary, Ministry of Home Affairs, New Delhi
2. Directorate General Border Security Force, 2nd Floor Block No. 10, C.G.O.
Complex, Lodi Road, New Delhi - 110003
3. The Dy. Inspector General /Clo D and L For Director General Bsfc, New
Delhi - 110003
4. The Inspector General Of Frontier Border Security Force, Gandhi Nagar,
Gujrat
5. The Commandant Border Security Force, Sector Head Quarter Gandhi
Nagar, Gujrat
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Sanjay Kumar Ojha, Advocate
For the Respondent/s : Mr. Subodh Kumar Jha, Sr.C.G.C.
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE JUSTICE SMT. G. ANUPAMA CHAKRAVARTHY
ORAL JUDGMENT
Date : 11-02-2026
1. The petitioner has filed the instant
application for the following relief:
“For issuance of an appropriate
Writ, order or direction to quash the
order dated 31.10.2012 whereby and
whereunder the respondent No.3 has
rejected the statutory petition dated
19/7/2012 on 31/10/2012 of the
petitioner and further for direction that
Patna High Court CWJC No.19632 of 2013 dt.11-02-2026
2/4
petitioner be reinstated in service with
all consequential benefits.”
2. At the outset, the Learned counsel
appearing on behalf of the respondent–Union of
India raised a preliminary objection regarding the
maintainability of the Writ petition on the ground of
lack of territorial jurisdiction. It has been submitted
that the petitioner admittedly an employee of BSF
was posted at SHQ/Gandhinagar, and the
impugned order was passed by the competent
authority at Gandhinagar, Gujarat. Therefore, the
entire cause of action has arisen within the
territorial jurisdiction of the Courts in the State of
Gujarat, and consequently, this Court lacks
jurisdiction to entertain the present Writ petition.
3. It has further been contended that
the petitioner has invoked the jurisdiction of this
Court merely on the ground that the dismissal
order of appeal was served upon him at his native
place in the State of Bihar. According to the
Learned counsel for the respondents, mere service
Patna High Court CWJC No.19632 of 2013 dt.11-02-2026
3/4
of the order within the territorial jurisdiction of this
Court does not confer jurisdiction, as no part of the
substantive cause of action has arisen within the
State of Bihar.
4. The Learned counsel for the
respondents has also drawn the attention of this
Court to an order passed by a Coordinate Bench in
a similar matter, i.e., CWJC No. 9289 of 2022
(Sanjay Kumar Singh vs. The Union of India &
Ors.), decided on 31.01.2026, wherein an identical
issue relating to territorial jurisdiction was
considered.
5. This Court has heard the Learned
counsel for the petitioner as well as Learned
counsel for the respondents and has carefully
considered the submissions advanced.
6. In view of the aforesaid submissions
and keeping in mind the order passed by the
Coordinate Bench of this Court, it is evident that
the cause of action relating to the petitioner has
arisen entirely in the State of Gujarat. Accordingly,
this Court is of the considered opinion that the
Patna High Court CWJC No.19632 of 2013 dt.11-02-2026
4/4
present Writ petition is not maintainable before
this Court for want of territorial jurisdiction.
7. Consequently, the Writ petition
stands disposed of, with liberty to the petitioner to
avail of the appropriate remedy before the
competent court having jurisdiction in the State of
Gujarat, within a period of three months from the
date of this order.
8. The Writ petition is, accordingly,
disposed of with the aforesaid observations and
directions.
9. Interlocutory Application, if any, shall
stands disposed of.
(G. Anupama Chakravarthy, J)
Spd/-
AFR/NAFR NAFR
CAV DATE NA
Uploading Date 12.02.2026
Transmission Date
Checking your session…