DSQ SOFTWARE LTD CIT NAGAR CHENNAI Vs. SPECIAL DIRECTOR ENFORCEMENT DIRECTORATE MINISTRY OF FINANCE GOVERNMENT OF INDIA DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE MUMBAI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) COMMON ORDER: Since the issues involved in all the four writ petitions are identical, these writ petitions are decided by this common order.

(2.) WHILE the petitioner in W.P. No. 25914 of 2007 is a Company registered under the Companies Act, 1956 (hereinafter referred to as ?The Company?), the petitioners in the other three writ petitions are individuals, who are none other than the Directors of the Company.

(3.) THE first respondent, namely, the Special Director, Enforcement Directorate, Mumbai, in his common counter affidavit has accepted the facts, that he had conducted the adjudication proceedings at Mumbai and passed the common order, dated 31.5.2005, against which, the petitioners went on appeal before the Tribunal at Delhi and the impugned order regarding pre-deposit was made at New Delhi. THE contention of the first respondent is that the petitioners have not disclosed any facts showing the cause of action for filing these writ petitions, having arisen fully or at least in any part within the jurisdiction of this Court. According to him, when the order of the original authority made in Mumbai and the impugned order of the Appellate Tribunal made at New Delhi are challenged by the petitioners herein by way of writ petitions, it is an essential pre-requisite for the petitioners to disclose the facts constituting the cause of action in whole or in part having arisen within the jurisdiction of this Court; in the absence of any jurisdictional facts having been disclosed, the writ petitions are liable to be dismissed for the reason of want of jurisdiction under Article 226(2) of the Constitution of India.