- (1.) By means of the present writ petition, the petitioner is challenging the order of Commandant, TRG Central Industrial Security Force, National Industrial Security Academy, Hyderabad, Andhra Pradesh (hereinafter referred to as the "Commandant"), by which the offer of appointment has been withdrawn.
(2.) Learned Assistant Solicitor General raised a preliminary objection that the writ petition is not maintainable at Allahabad as the impugned order has been passed by the Commandant, Hyderbabad. It appears that the petitioner has been offered appointment as SI/ EXE in CISF vide letter No. E-37013/36 SI(E)/NISA/Admn.II/10/927, dated 9.11.2010. It appears that certain criminal proceedings have been initiated against the petitioner in the State of U.P. Learned Counsel for the petitioner submitted that on account of criminal proceeding pending in the State of U.P. without giving any opportunity of hearing, the impugned order has been passed by the Commandant. He submitted that the criminal proceeding has been finalized and the petitioner has been acquitted, therefore, partly cause of action arises in the State of U.P. and, thus, the writ petition is maintainable at Allahabad.
(3.) In support of the contention, he relied upon the decision of this Court in the case of jagveer Singh v. Union of INdia and others, 2006 62 AllLR 902and the decision of the Division Bench of this Court in the case of Namita Singh v. State of U.P. and others, in Special Appeal No. 39 of 2009 decided on 5.2.2009. Learned Assistant Solicitor General submitted that the order challenged in the present writ petition has been passed by the Commandant, Hyderabad. The reason for withdrawal of the offer of appointment may be criminal case pending against the petitioner in the State of U.P. but since the impugned order has been passed by the Commandant, Hyderabad, the cause of action arises at Hyderabad and, therefore, this Court has no jurisdiction in the matter.;