MIHIR KUMAR JHA, J.:–Heard learned counsel for the parties. 2. The prayer of the petitioner in this writ application reads as follows:— “1. That this is an application for issuance of writ in the nature of mandamus or any other appropriate writ(s)/order(s)/direction(s) commanding the Respondents 1st set to re-instate the services of the petitioner from the date of dismissal i.e. 01.06.2008 by quashing the dismissal order No. Estt./115Bn/55FC- APM/08/330-37 dated 06th Jan 2008 (Contained in Annexure-8) including the appellate order No. 06/34/2008/SP/CLO(D&L)/BSF/2957-6 (Contained in Annexure-9) whereby and where under, the petitioner has been dismissed from his service by the Respondent 1st Set and further be pleased to command the Respondents 2nd set to submit report to the Respondents 1st set to the effect that the petitioner belongs to Schedule Tribe of Khariya Community by quashing report vide L/No. 412 dated 1403.2007 (Contained in Annexure-2) and further be pleased to grant any other reliefs for which the petitioner is found entitled for.” 3. Before, learned counsel for the petitioner could make his submission on merit, there was a preliminary objection on behalf of Mr. Anjani Kumar Sharan that the writ application, on account of lack of territorial jurisdiction, shall not be maintainable. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner, having been aware of such preliminary objection also raised on 17.4.2015, was not surprised and in fact had proceeded to answer such preliminary objection on the ground that the writ application against the order of termination of service of the petitioner dated 6.01.2008, having been passed by Commandant 115 Battalion, B.S.F., Manipur (Imphal) or its affirmance by the Director General of Boarder Security Force, Delhi vide order dated 2.5.2008, cannot be maintainable before this Court but, then, the petitioner has also sought a relief for quashing the letter dated 14.3.2007 and 20.12.2007 as contained in Annexure-2 and 7 which were issued from the territorial jurisdiction of this Court and, therefore, there being a part of cause of action for the petitioner by way of assailing these two letters, the petitioner can maintain this writ application for all the relief sought in paragraph no.1. In this regard, strong reliance has been placed by the learned counsel for the petitioner on a Division Bench judgment of this Court in the case of Saryu Singh Vs. The Union of India & Ors. reported in 2015(2)PLJR 256. In this regard, strong reliance has been placed by the learned counsel for the petitioner on a Division Bench judgment of this Court in the case of Saryu Singh Vs. The Union of India & Ors. reported in 2015(2)PLJR 256. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner is a poor person and, therefore, he should not be non-suited on the ground of jurisdiction. 5. In the considered opinion of this Court, the cause of action for the petitioner emanates in relation to his dismissal from service. The petitioner had got appointment in the Board Security Force by projecting that he was a candidate of schedule tribe candidate. When this issue with regard to the petitioner being a candidate of schedule category arose while he was continuing in service at Manipur and the petitioner came to support his claim of belonging to schedule tribe category on the basis of a certificate issued allegedly by Saran Collectorate under the signature of District Welfare Officer dated 4.3.1991, an enquiry was made by the Deputy Commandant of the B.S.F. and the reply thereof was given on 16.3.2007 (Annexure-2) by the District Welfare Officer that the certificate was never issued by his office and in fact in Saran district, there was not a single person of Khariya by caste which was a schedule tribe. Thereafter, the matter was further enquired into and the same view was reiterated in the letter of the Collector of Saran district addressed to the authority of the Board Security Force. This was done by the letter dated 20.12.2007 is Annexure-7 to the writ application. 6. Let it be noted that the petitioner was subjected to dismissal from service by way of his being subjected to a trial in terms of Section 230 of the B.S.F. Act and was found guilty of a charge framed against him. The petitioner was awarded sentence by way of dismissal from service. This order was passed on 6.1.2008 and that being relevant is quoted herein below:— “OFFICE OF THE COMMANDANT: TAX HQ BN BSF MANTRIPOKHRI (IMPHAL) //ORDER// No 012543313 Const Azad Prasad Mahato of this unit was tried by Summary Security Force Court on 23rd Nov-2007 & 06/01/2008 at Tax HQ 115 Bn BSF Mantripokhri, Imphal (Manipur) for the offence committed by the individual under Section 23 of BSF Act 1968 and found guilty of the charge. The Court awarded sentence to the individual “TO BE DISMISSED FROM SERVICE.” 2. The findings and sentence of the Court were promulgated to accused on 06/01/2008 at Tac HQ BSF Mantripokhri, Imphal, Manipur. 3. The individual is hereby SOS from this Unit with effect from 06/01/08 (AN). (Brajesh Kumar) Commandant 115 BN BSF No.Estt/115Bn/SSFC-APM/08/330-37 Dated, the 06th Jan-2008” 7. As against such order, the petitioner carried an appeal and the appeal was also dismissed on 7.5.2008 at Delhi. The appellate order takes note of the fact that it was the petitioner who, during trial, had taken his defence and wanted verification of his caste and that such verification was done from the office of the District Magistrate, Chapra but even that report had confirmed that the caste certificate produced by the petitioner was a fake one. The appellate authority, therefore, had held that the petitioner’s enrollment was based on a fake document, inasmuch as, the petitioner was appointed on the basis of his claim of being a schedule tribe candidate but that was found to be incorrect. 8. A question, therefore, first of all, would be as to whether any part of cause of action has arisen within the territorial jurisdiction of this Court? The petitioner’s dismissal on the basis of trial at Manipur under the BSF Act had been completed and he was dismissed from service at Imphal. Again the appeal was dismissed at Delhi. Merely because in those trial, some certificate of the petitioner was sought to be verified which was issued from the State of Bihar will not give any part of cause of action in the Patna High Court to maintain this writ application in Patna High Court. The two letters mentioned in the relief portion dated 14.3.2007 and 20.12.2007 are inter-departmental communication made by one authority to another authority and they are not concluded order so as to give any part of cause of action to the petitioner. 9. Let it be noted that a writ application will never lie with regard to some communication being made by one authority to another authority. In the present case, it is the order of trial of the petitioner which has led to the dismissal as has been shown from Anenxure-8, the impugned order. 9. Let it be noted that a writ application will never lie with regard to some communication being made by one authority to another authority. In the present case, it is the order of trial of the petitioner which has led to the dismissal as has been shown from Anenxure-8, the impugned order. That was passed under the B.S.F. Act and Rules within the State of Manipur and its affirmation in appeal was also made at Delhi by the Director General, B.S.F. therefore, this court will have no difficulty in saying that actually no part of cause of action had arisen within the territorial jurisdiction of this Court. 10. The reliance placed by the learned counsel for the petitioner on the Division Bench judgment in the case of Saryu Singh (supra) is also wholly misplaced. That writ application filed by Saryu. Singh, who had superannuated from service on 30.4.1990 while holding the post of Deputy Chief Legal Manager in Northern Coalfield Limited, Singrauli, was related to claim of his enhancement of pension. Saryu. Singh, in fact, was already drawing pension while being stationed in the State of Bihar after his retirement and a question arose with regard to admissibility of the higher amount of pension and, therefore, this Court went to hold that so far the payment of pension or its enhancement is concerned, each and every part of cause of action to him had arisen within the territorial jurisdiction of this Court. 11. In the present case, the position is not only different but converse. The petitioner was employed in B.S.F. and was working at Manipur. He was subjected to a trial at Imphal in the State of Manipur. His order of dismissal was also passed in Manipur and, therefore, his each and every part of cause of action had arisen at Manipur or at best at Delhi where the appellate order affirming the order of dismissal was passed. 12. Having thus found that the writ application is not maintainable on the ground of territorial jurisdiction, this Court was also not required to go into the aspect as to whether the petitioner’s relief, being sought on the ground of his poverty, should be taken to be a special feature for allowing to press this writ application. 12. Having thus found that the writ application is not maintainable on the ground of territorial jurisdiction, this Court was also not required to go into the aspect as to whether the petitioner’s relief, being sought on the ground of his poverty, should be taken to be a special feature for allowing to press this writ application. What however really makes this Court now to decide the question on merit is petitioner’s dare devil effort to dupe the authorities of BSF in obtaining appointment by claiming to be a member of schedule tribe. Let it be noted that the petitioner does not even dare to produce original copy of his certificate contained in letter no. 206 and has filed only a type copy by way of Annexure-1 which reads as follows:— ^^lkj.k lekgj.kky;] ¼dY;k.k iz'kk[kk½] NijkA tkfr izek.k i= i=kad 206 fnukad 4.3.91 izekf.kr fd;k tkrk gS fd vktkn egrks vkRet Jh dSyk'k egrks xzke@iks0 cs:bZ] Fkkuk&cfukiqj ftyk lkj.k ds fuoklh gSaA ;s [kfj;k tkfr ds gSA tks Hkkjr ljdkj ds vuqlwfpr tkfr ,oa vuqlwfpr tutkfr lwph ¼la'kksf/kr½ vkns'k 1956 ds vuqlkj vuq0 t0 tkfr ekuh xbZ gSA ;g tkfr izek.k i= iz[k.M fodkl ink0 cfu;kiqj ds izek.k i= la0 102 fnukad 2.2.91 }kjk iznRr tkfr izek.k i= ds vk/kkj ij fuxZr fd;k tkrk gSA g0@&vLi"V ftyk dY;k.k ink0 lkj.k] NijkA** 13. It was this certificate which gave the petitioner appointment on the basis of his claim of his belonging to Khaira by caste a schedule tribe under the Presidential order for the State of Bihar. It was this certificate which gave the petitioner appointment on the basis of his claim of his belonging to Khaira by caste a schedule tribe under the Presidential order for the State of Bihar. This was found to be later on forged as would be evident from reading of the letter of the District Welfare Officer dated 16.3.2007 as contained in Annexure-2 which reads as follows:— ^^lkj.k lekgj.kky;] Nijk] ftyk dY;k.k dk;kZy;A i= la0& 412 @d0 fucaf/kr Mkd xksiuh;A izs"kd] ftyk dY;k.k ink0 lkj.k NijkA lsok esa] Jh vfuy dqekj mi lekns"Vk 115 oha okfguh lhek lqj{kk cy] irhjke iks0 vrjkbZ] ftyk nf{k.k nhuktiqj Ai0ca0A Nijk] fnukad 16.3.07 fo"k;&tkfr izek.k i= dk lR;kiu izfrosnuA egk'k;] mi;qZDr fo"k;d vkids i= la0 LFkk@115 okfguh@HkrhZ vuq0 tutkfr @07@332 fnukad 15 tuojh 07 ds lkFk layXu vkids okfguh esa dk;Zjr dkfeZd la0 012543313 vkj{kh vktkn egrks firk dSyk'k egrks xzke&iks0 cs:bZ Fkkuk cfu;kiqj ftyk lkj.k tkfr izek.k i= i=kad 206 fn0 4.3.91 dk Nk;kizfr dk lR;kiu ds lEcU/k esa dguk gS fd lkj.k ftyk esa [kfj;kA vuq0 tutkfrAtkfr dh la[;k 'kqU; gSA vr% iz'uxr tkfr izek.k i= mi;qZDr O;fDr dks bl dk;kZy; ls fuxZr ugha gSA lwpukFkZ ,oa vko';d dk;kZFkZ izsf"krA g0@& vLi"V 14.3.07 ftyk dY;k.k ink0 lkj.k] NijkA** 14. Not only that, when the petitioner, in course of trial at Manipur had reiterated that his caste certificate was correct and authentic, another communication was made by the authorities of B.S.F. at Manipur, this time directing to the Collector, Saran district by a letter dated 12.09.2007 which reads as follows:— "No. Estt/115/Recctt-Sl 07 4065 Dated 12 Sept. 07 To, The District Magistrate District- Chhapra (Bihar) SUBJECT- SCHEDULE TRIBE CERTIFICATE Sir, It is submitted that No. 012543313 C1 Azad Prasad Mahato S/o Shri Kailash Mahato, Vill-Berui, P.O.-Berui, P.S.-Berui, District-Chhapra (Bihar) presently serving in this unit had enrolled in BSF during the year 2001. During enrollment in BSF he had produced a Scheduled Tribe certificate which was issued by District Welfare Officer, Saran, Chhapra Dist. Bihar (copy enclosed). As per direction of Higher HQrs. this office had sent a letter to the Distt. Welfare Officer, Saran Samaharnalaya (Welfare Section) Distt.-Chhapra (Bihar) vide L No. Estt/11Rectt-ST/07/332 Dated 15.01.07 for verification of Scheduled Tribe certificate issued by the said office (Copy enclosed). In reply to this office letter under reference, the Dist. Bihar (copy enclosed). As per direction of Higher HQrs. this office had sent a letter to the Distt. Welfare Officer, Saran Samaharnalaya (Welfare Section) Distt.-Chhapra (Bihar) vide L No. Estt/11Rectt-ST/07/332 Dated 15.01.07 for verification of Scheduled Tribe certificate issued by the said office (Copy enclosed). In reply to this office letter under reference, the Dist. Welfare Officer, Saran Chhapra Bihar vide L/No. 412 dated 14.03.07 has intimated that no khaira community (Scheduled Tribe) caste is existing in Distt. Saran area (copy enclosed). Now the individual has strongly objected to the above remarks of the Dist. Welfare Officer, Saran. The individual claims that there are No. of families of the Kharia caste which comes under the S.L. status in Saran subdivision of Chhapra Distt. Keeping in view of the above it is requested that the tactual posmon may please be obtained from concerned office and may please be intimated to this office at the earliest so that the disciplinary action pending against no. 012543313 CT Azad Prasad Mahato can be settled. Your kind co-operation in this regard shall be highly appreciated. Thanking you Your's faithfully sd/- (K. ..................... FOR COMMANDANT HS BN BSF" 15. It was in reply to that letter dated 12.9.2007 that the Collector of Saran district himself had found the stand taken by the District Welfare Officer to be correct. To that extent, Annexure-7, the letter of the Collector dated 20.12.2007 is also quoted herein below:— ^^dk;kZy;] lkj.k] NijkA issz"kd] ftyk inkf/kdkjh] lkj.k] NijkA lsok esa] ds0 /kht ckbte] milekns"Vk@iz'kklfud vf/kdkjh] 115 okfguh lhek lqj{kk cy] 816 ,e0ih0vks0 }kjk iz0,0ch0v0 fo"k;& Jh vktkn egrks dk tkfr izek.k i= lR;kiu ds laca/k esaA egk'k;] mi;qZDr fo"k;d vkids fo'ks"k okgd Jh lR;sUnz dqekj Aeq0vk0A ua0 87002927 ds ek/;e ls vkids la0 LFkk@115] tkap 07 x 148 fnukad 14.12.07 ds }kjk vktkn egrks firk Jh dSyk'k egrks xzke iks0 cs:bZ Fkkuk cfu;kiqj ftyk lkj.k dk tkfr izek.k i= lR;kiu gsrq yk;k x;k gSA bl dk;kZy; dk i=kad 412 fnukad 16.3.07 ds }kjk lkj.k ftyk esa [kfj;k Avuq0 tu0 tkfrA tkfr dh la[;k 'kwU; gS ftldh lwpuk nh tk pqdh gSA vr% iz'uxr tkfr izek.k i= la0 206 fnukad 4.3.1991 mDr O;fDr dk bl dk;kZy; ls fuxZr ugha gSA lwpukFkZ ,oa vko';d dk;kZFkZ izsf"krA fo'oklHkktu g0@& vLi"V ftyk ink0 lkj.k] NijkA fnukad 20.12.07** 16. Thus it becomes clear that the petitioner was miserably exposed with his false claim of belonging to Schedule Tribe on the basis of Certificate produced by him at the time of his appointment in BSF. 17. Now, this Court would find from perusal of the writ application that not a word has been said that even a single Khaira by caste is residing in the district of Saran. This in the opinion of this Court was the most crucial aspect because the District Welfare Officer had not only gone to hold the certificate claimed to be issued by his office to be fake and infact forged and in no way to have been issued from his office but had also added that in the district of Saran, there was not a single person of Khaira by caste. Therefore, it was all the more important for the petitioner to at least make an assertion in the writ application with some evidence that the plea taken by the District Welfare Officer was incorrect. 18. By now it is also well settled that the onus of proving that a person belongs to reserved category of Schedule Caste or Schedule Tribe is on the person who claims to be so. The Apex Court in this regard in the case of Ct. Sundaram Vs. Union of India reported in (1995) 4 SCC 644 has held that if a person is appointed against the reserved quota on the basis of a false certificate obtained by him to this effect that he is a Schedule Caste candidate when infact he is not the authorities concerned would be justified in punishing him. 19. Thus when this vital aspect has not been explained by the petitioner in any manner even in this writ petition, this Court will have no difficulty in coming to a conclusion that the petitioner had actually played fraud while seeking his appointment as a Schedule Tribe candidate on the basis of the caste certificate as contained in Annexure-1. 20. 19. Thus when this vital aspect has not been explained by the petitioner in any manner even in this writ petition, this Court will have no difficulty in coming to a conclusion that the petitioner had actually played fraud while seeking his appointment as a Schedule Tribe candidate on the basis of the caste certificate as contained in Annexure-1. 20. As noted above the petitioner has not produced the original copy of that certificate as contained in Annexure-1 which is only a typed copy and learned counsel for the petitioner has also said that he is not in possession of the original copy of Annexure-1 though he was under obligation to produce the same in view of the affidavit of the petitioner claiming it to be true copy of the original, this court will have no option but to direct Collector of Saran district to get First Information Report lodged against the petitioner for forging a document as contained in Annexure-1 filed before this Court and, thereafter also take any other appropriate action against the petitioner as may be permissible in law. 21. A time infact now has come when the people obtaining employment on forged certificate should not be left only with the order of termination of service. If such employment has been obtained by a person by committing forgery and playing fraud, he will have to be also answerable under the criminal law. Here in this case, the Court has found a prima facie a case for taking an appropriate action against the petitioner including lodging a First Information Report against him both in respect of forging a caste certificate as also obtaining employment in BSF on the same. 22. With the aforesaid observation and direction this application is dismissed. 23. There would be, however, no order as to costs. 24. Let a copy of this order be sent to the Collector, Saran district at Chhapra for its compliance in letter and spirit and also submission of an action taken report within a period of two months from the date of receipt of this order by him.