SHASHI MANGLA Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is an application praying for review of order dated 10.7.1995 passed in CWP 2439/95 and CM 4095/95 dismissing the W.P. of the petitioner.

(2.) The grievance of the petitioner in the Writ petition was that respondents No. 5 to 10 wrongfully claimed certain charges towards duty of Central Excise, which the petitioner 'had to ultimately pay. According to the petitioner the said amunt had been paid to respondents 2 to 4 under the provisions of Central Excise and Salt Act as well as Central Sales Tax Act. On hearing Mr. R.K. Mangia the GPA. holder of the petitioner, this court by order 10.7.1995 dismissed the w.p. holding that since respondent No. 2 to 10 are all at Bombay, it is appropriate that such a w.p. should have been filed in Bombay High Court.

(3.) The petitioner now through this review petition urged before us that since respondent No. 1 is located at Delhi and is also the sole beneficiary of the amount of duty of Excise and Central Sales Tax collected and deposited in the Consolidated Fund, this court should have entertained the w.p. and it acted illegally in dismissing w.p. although it had jurisdiction. He futher submitted that respondents 5 & 6 granted dealership to the petitioner to sell their goods in the State of Delhi & Haryana, business offers were made at Delhi and orders were issued at Delhi and goods were despatched to Delhi and as such the court in Delhi has the territorial Jurisdiction to decide the issues raised in the w.p.