WHERE COMMUNICATION OF TERMINATION ORDER REACHES THE EMPLOYEE; TERRITORIAL JURISDICTION OF THAT COURT ARISES. P. K.S. SRIVASTAVA V. UNION OF INDIA [SCC ONLINE DEL 6149, DECIDED ON 1.12.2016]
In a case relating to maintainability of Writ petition on the ground of territorial jurisdiction of the court, the petitioner questioned his termination in relation with his contractual services with the respondent.
ISSUES BEFORE COURT
Petitioner is the Director of Goa shipyard Limited claimed that the High Court of Delhi has jurisdiction since the termination order has been issued by the Ministry to the Chairperson of GSL in Delhi even though the letter has been communicated to him in
Goa and not in Delhi.
The Ministry defended by saying that this Court did not have the territorial jurisdiction as the cause of action in the present case is the communication of the order and without such communication of an order to the person concerned; the cause of action is not complete for filing of a case in a court of law.( Territorial jurisdiction of that Court arises where communication of termination order reaches the employee i.e. legal cause of action is completed; http://scconline / Dec 19, 2016)
Whether just because the Government of India has issued its letter at Delhi would this by default give territorial jurisdiction to this Court although this letter has not been communicated to the petitioner at Delhi.
The Court observed that the communication of termination is not complete until and unless a person knows about the order of termination of services being passed, and an employee will only know about an order of termination of services only when it is communicated to him, and therefore, since communication is a compulsory link and a sine qua non for arising of the cause of action, hence cause of action will only be therefore complete for filing of judicial proceedings on communication and therefore the place where the communication is made would be the place where the territorial jurisdiction would exist, although the order of may have been passed elsewhere i.e. Delhi in the present case. (Territorial jurisdiction of that Court arises where communication of termination order reaches the employee i.e. legal cause of action is completed; http://blog.scconline.com/ Dec 19, 2016)
The mere existence of an order in the government file does not result in a binding order for creating legal rights, and therefore, when legal rights are created only on communication and a legal cause of action is complete only on such communication, thus accordingly it is the place where the order of termination of services is communicated that would be the place where the territorial jurisdiction arises. (Termination of Service: Jurisdiction Lies At the Place Where Communication Has
Been Made: Delhi HC; livelaw/dec 3, 2016)