Law:

Section:

Article 226 of the Constitution of India - High Courts - Power to issue certain writs - Whether where cause of action has arisen in Maharashtra State and even charge-sheet, if required, is to be filed in Maharashtra State, Delhi High Court cannot entertain writ petition - Held, yes FACTS The respondent Nos. 5 and 6, who were working at the relevant time at Mumbai, were alleged to have taken advantage of their official position and obtained pecuniary benefit. The acts of omission and/or commission which were alleged, had been so omitted or./and committed at Mumbai. The petitioner, in the instant petition, prayed for directions to respondent Nos. 3 and 4, the Central Vigilance Commission and CBI, respectively, to register FIR against respondent Nos. 5 and 6 and for initiating disciplinary proceedings against them for alleged irregularities. HELD In a petition under article 226, the Court has to see where the cause of action has arisen. The Court would have to consider other aspects as well, such as parties residing at Mumbai who were alleged to have been involved in the illegal act. It was also required to be seen that the entire original records were available in Mumbai and no part of the records was in Delhi. The properties in question were situated at Mumbai and, therefore, police would have to take action at Mumbai. In any event, when the entire cause of action had arisen at Mumbai, it was most appropriate to relegate the petitioner to the appropriate forum in Mumbai for making a grievance. [Para 6] As indicated in the petition itself, it was very clear that cause of action against respondents arose within territorial limits of the State of Maharashtra. As no cause of action had arisen in the State of Delhi and even charge-sheet, if required, was to be filed in the Court at Mumbai, the Delhi High Court could not entertain the petition in view of the provisions contained in the Constitution and the law laid down by the Apex Court. In the result, the petition was dismissed for want of jurisdiction. [Para 18] CASES REFERRED TO Union of India v. Adani Exports Ltd. [2002] 1 SCC 567 [Para 7], Oil & Natural Gas Commission, v. Utpal Kumar Basu [1994] 4 SCC 711…

Deprecated: trim(): Passing null to parameter #1 ($string) of type string is deprecated in /home/digixyei/sldsystempk.com/view/master-layout/view_case.php on line 492