IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.1836 of 2011 Dharmendra Kumar …Petitioner Versus 1. The Union Of India through Secretary, Department of Home, Government of India, New Delhi 2. The Commandant,69 Battalion, Central Reserve Police Force, Mankhooli, Tinsukia, Assam 3. The Assistant Commandant Cum Conducting Officer, 68 Battalion, Central Reserve Police Force, Mankhooli, Tinsukia, Assam 4. The Deputy Police Inspector General, Central Reserve Police Force, Gandhi Nagar Range(Gujarat) 5. The Deputy Police Inspector General, Group Centre, Gandhi Nagar(Gujarat) 6. The Officer Commandant, A.B.C.D.E.F. & G, Head Quarters, 68 Battalion, Central Reserve Police Force, Mankhooli, Tinsukia, Assam 7. The Collector Officer, 68 Battalion, Central Reserve Police Force, Mankhooli, Tinsukia, Assam …Respondents ----------- 04. 01.08.2011 Heard both sides. Petitioner seeks issuance of appropriate writ to quash the order dated 3rd February, 2010 issued by the Commandant, 68 Battalion, Central Reserve Police Force, Tinsukia, Assam. Learned counsel for the respondents submits that the present application is fit to be dismissed on two counts. Firstly, this Court, based on the pleadings, shall have no territorial jurisdiction. Secondly, the order is appealable. Petitioner is governed by the Act called ‘Central Reserve Police Force Act, 1949’ and the Rule framed thereunder called ‘Central Reserve Police Force Rule, 1955. It is pointed out that under rule 28, an appeal is maintainable against the impugned order. This Court, in that view of the matter, refuses to invoke its extra-ordinary and discretionary writ jurisdiction in the matter. 2 Let the petitioner invoke the jurisdiction of the authority under rule 28 of the Rules by filing appeal. This Court observes that if an appeal against the impugned order is filed within four weeks from today, the appellate authority shall consider the same on its own merit in accordance with law. The application is dismissed with liberty aforesaid. hr ( Kishore K. Mandal )