In Brief
A retired coal mine employee receiving pension at his native place in Bihar filed two writ petitions before the Patna High Court. The first was dismissed on jurisdictional grounds; the second, concerning cessation of his pension, was similarly dismissed. The Supreme Court held that the Patna High Court had territorial jurisdiction because the pension was being received within its territorial limits, and part of the cause of action (stoppage of pension and demand for refund) arose there. The Court distinguished the two writ petitions as having wholly different causes of action. The Court allowed the appeal, revived the writ petition, and directed provisional pension payment to the appellant pending final decision.">
The lawyer headnote and full judgment text are available to registered users.