At the Stage of Framing Charge, Presumption Suffices; Suicide Note and Grave Suspicion Enough: Allahabad High Court Refuses to Quash Charge Under Section 306 IPC 173 CrPC | Framing of Charge Marks End of Investigation—Complainant Cannot Reopen Probe Merely by Citing Police Lapses: Bombay High Court Recovery Alone Cannot Prove Guilt: Andhra Pradesh High Court Acquits Accused in Murder Case Photos, Videos Must Go: Supreme Court Binds Warring Spouses to Clean Up Social Media in Matrimonial Settlement Standard for Bail Under Section 319 CrPC Is Higher Than Framing of Charge, But Short of Conviction: Supreme Court Grants Bail to Accused Summoned Mid-Trial State Cannot Arbitrarily Deny Subsidies to 'New Industrial Units' by Retrospectively Applying Expansion Caps: Supreme Court Companies Act | Offence Under Section 448 Is Covered Under Section 447: Supreme Court Bars Private Complaint Without SFIO Nod “See-To-It” Obligation Is Not A Guarantee Under Indian Law: Supreme Court Clarifies Scope Of Section 126 ICA In IBC Disputes Mere Employment of Litigant’s Relatives in Police or Court Doesn't Prove Judicial Bias: Supreme Court Sets Aside Transfer of Criminal Case Reserved Candidate Availing Relaxed Standards in Prelims Cannot Migrate to General Quota for Cadre Allocation: Supreme Court Mere Vesting Does Not Mean Possession: Supreme Court Rules ULC Proceedings Abated For Failure To Serve Mandatory Notice To Actual Occupants Contempt of Courts Act | Natural Justice in Administrative Action: Supreme Court Directs West Bengal Govt to Re-Adjudicate Teachers' Arrears Claims Live-In Relationship with Married Man Not a ‘Relationship in the Nature of Marriage’ Under Domestic Violence Act: Bombay High Court Applies Supreme Court Guidelines Income Tax Act | Substitution of Shares held as Stock-in-Trade upon Amalgamation constitutes Taxable Business Income if Commercially Realisable: Supreme Court Judges Cannot Enact Their Own Protocols During Bail Hearings: Supreme Court Sets Aside Sweeping Age Determination Directions In POCSO If There Is Knowledge That Injury Is Likely To Cause Death, But No Intention Falls Under Section 304 Part II:  Supreme Court High Court Ignored POCSO’s Statutory Rigour, Committed Grave Error in Granting Bail: Supreme Court Cancels Bail of Gang-Rape Accused Section 22 HSA | Co-Heirs Have Statutory Right of Pre-Emption Even in Urban Property: Punjab & Haryana High Court 138 NI Act | Issuance of Separate Cheques Gives Rise to Independent Causes of Action, Even if Drawn for Same Underlying Transaction: Supreme Court

High Court Dismisses Writ Petition Challenging Termination of Railway Protection Force Constable During Probation

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


In a recent judgment, the High Court of Judicature for Rajasthan, Jaipur Bench, dismissed a writ petition filed by Norat Rana, challenging the termination of his services as a constable in the Railway Protection Force (RPF) during his probation period. The judgment, delivered by Hon’ble Mr. Justice Anoop Kumar Dhand, addressed various legal aspects including the maintainability of appeal and revision, jurisdiction of the court, and the concept of cause of action.

The court observed that the petitioner’s appeal before the Appellate Authority was dismissed on a technical ground, as the petitioner was not treated as an enrolled member of the force. Therefore, the court held that the alternative remedy of filing a revision petition was not available to the petitioner. Quoting the judgment, the court stated, “When the Appellate Authority is of the view that appeal is not maintainable, then how Revision Petition is maintainable when the petitioner has not been treated as an enrolled member of the Force.”

Addressing the issue of jurisdiction, the court emphasized that the cause of action must have a nexus with the court’s jurisdiction. The petitioner’s service termination and relevant proceedings took place in the State of Maharashtra, and no cause of action or part cause of action arose in the State of Rajasthan. The court, therefore, concluded that it did not have jurisdiction to entertain the writ petition. The judgment stated, “The facts which are pleaded in the petition do not disclose that any cause of action or part cause of action has arisen within the territorial jurisdiction of this court.”

Consequently, the court dismissed the writ petition but granted the petitioner the liberty to seek an appropriate remedy before the appropriate forum. The judgment highlighted that the dismissal of the writ petition would not prevent the petitioner from approaching the territorial jurisdiction forum. The court remarked, “This judgment will not come in the way of the petitioner to approach the territorial jurisdiction forum.”

This judgment serves as an important legal precedent, emphasizing the significance of following proper procedures during probationary periods and the necessity for a cause of action to establish jurisdiction. The ruling provides clarity on the maintainability of appeals and revision petitions in similar cases.

The decision has potential implications for individuals facing termination during their probation period and highlights the importance of understanding the relevant rules and jurisdictional considerations when challenging such actions.

 Date of Decision: 26th April 2023

Norat Rana vs Union Of India

[gview file="https://lawyer-e-news.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/07/Norat-Rana-v.-Union-of-India-26-April-23-Raj-HC.pdf"]

Latest Legal News