IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.13321 of 2008 SURINDER CHOUDHARY, SON OF LATE PHAGUNI CHOUDHARY RESIDENT OF VILLAGE MADHAUL, P.O. MOTIPUR, VIA TAJPUR, P.S. TAJPUR DIST. SAMASTIPUR. Versus 1. THE UNION OF INDIA THROUGH THE SECRETARY DEPARTMENT OF FINANCE(REVENUE) CUSTOM AND CENTRAL EXCISE NORTH BLOCK, NEW DELHI. 2. THE CHAIRMAN BOARD OF CUSTOM AND CENTRAL EXCISE DEPARMTENT OF REVENUE, GOVT. OF INDIA NORTH BLOCK, NEW DELHI. 3. THE COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOM AND CENTRAL EXCISE, NOIDA B.123, SECTOR V NOIDA U.P. 4. THE CHIEF COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOM AND CENTRAL EXCISE REVENUE BUILDING, BIRCHAND PATEL MARG, PATNA. ----------- 02. 13.12.2010 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the counsel for the Union of India, who filed counter affidavit asserting that no part of cause of action has arisen within the jurisdiction of this Court and this Court should not proceed with the hearing of the writ petition on merit. I regret not to accept the submission of the Union for the reasons indicated below. 2. Petitioner was an employee of M/s. Punjab Fibers Ltd. B- 2 UPSIDC Industrial Area Phase-II, Surajpur, Noida and while serving the employer he informed the authorities of the Central Excise Department that his employer is indulging in evasion of excise duty. On the basis of the information given by the petitioner proceedings were initiated against the employer. In retaliation petitioner was thrown out of job. Later he was served with the summons under Section 14 of the Central Excise and Salt Act, 1944 directing him to appear before the authorities to support his version of the allegation. In view of the summons received by the petitioner at his village home - 2 - in the district of Samastipur, Bihar, I am of the view that part of cause of action has arisen within the jurisdiction of this Court and the writ petition is maintainable. 3. Having heard counsel for the parties, it transpired that representation of the petitioner dated 30.12.2006, Annexure-11 for payment of interim compensation in terms of the provisions of the Reward Rules and the Procedures, Annexure-3 has not been considered so far. In the circumstances, I direct the Chairman, Custom and Central Excise, Finance Ministry, New Delhi to whom representation dated 30.12.2006 Anneure-11 is addressed to consider and dispose of the representation as per the provisions of the Rules, as early as possible, in any case within two months from the date of receipt of this order. Petitioner is at liberty to file further representation supplementing the grievance made in the representation dated 30.12.2006, which should also be taken into account while disposing of the representation dated 30.12.2006 within the time indicated in this order. 4. The writ application is, accordingly, disposed of. Rajesh/ (V.N. Sinha, J.)