- (1.) THE Court : By the present writ petition the petitioner has inter alia prayed for a writ in the nature of Mandamus commanding the respondents to withdraw, revoke and set aside the order of dismissal from the service of the respondent no. 2 company and to restrain them from taking any step in respect of the continuity of service of the company and for other reliefs.
(2.) THE case of the petitioner inter alia is that the petitioner was appointed in the year 1990 at Basantimata Colliery under the Coal India Limited. On January 2, 2006 he found a list of employees displayed in the notice board of the Bharat Coking Coal Limited, i.e., the respondent no. 2 herein as regards the order of dismissal of several employees who were attached to different collieries under the Chanch Victoria-12 on the ground of absenteeism of the petitioner from June 25, 2005. On the basis of an ex parte enquiry the order of dismissal was passed. The petitioner states that a tripartite agreement was signed and it was decided that workers who were below 45 years in age and whose absenteeism was not of more than 9 months would be reinstated in the service but without back wages. The petitioner made an appeal before the appropriate authority. The petitioner states that his age was only 21 years and his period of absenteeism was for only 74 days. Receiving no reply he filed another application on March 8, 2010. The petitioner alleges that the appropriate authority in July, 2011 had displayed a notice declaring that the appeal for reinstatement of several employees including that of the petitioner would not be considered and his appeal was thus rejected. By the present writ petition the petitioner has challenged this order of dismissal on various grounds.
(3.) THE respondents have taken a preliminary point of objection on the ground of lack of territorial jurisdiction of this court to entertain the petition. This point as such was heard as a preliminary point and the affidavit filed by the respondents nos. 2 to 5 is restricted to the question of the preliminary objection alone. The respondents' case is that a charge-sheet dated May 18, 2004 was issued by the Agent of Basantimata Colliery which is in the state of Jharkhand. The explanation submitted by the petitioner was considered by the Agent being the disciplinary authority and the regular departmental proceeding that was commenced, continued and concluded at the Basantimata Colliery which is outside the territorial jurisdiction of this court. According to them, no part of the cause of action has arisen within the territorial jurisdiction of this court and as such this court has no jurisdiction to entertain the petition.;