HARIHAR SONI Vs. STATE OF M.P.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India has been filed seeking the following reliefs:-

(2.) A preliminary objection has been raised by Shri Sharma with regard to territorial jurisdiction of this Court. It is submitted that the interstate permit to ply the Bus No.CG10 G 1600 was granted by competent authority of Chhattisgarh and it was signed by the competent authority of Madhya Pradesh and therefore, if petitioner has any grievance against the interstate permit granted to petitioner, then he must approach the Chhattisgarh High Court for redressal of his grievance.

(3.) In reply, it is submitted by counsel for petitioner that petitioner has already approached the competent authority of Chhattisgarh against the interstate permit granted to respondent to ply Bus No.CG10 G 1600 from Pendra Road to Shahdol via Sivni, Jaithari, Anuppur, Budhar. It is submitted that since the interstate permit was countersigned by the competent authority of Madhya Pradesh which is situated at Gwalior, therefore, in the light of provisions of Article 226 of the Constitution of India, it is clear that part of cause of action has arisen within the territorial jurisdiction of this Court and therefore, this petition is maintainable. Counsel for petitioner has also referred to Ss. 88, 88 (3) of the Motor Vehicles Act to substantiate his submissions. It is further submitted by Shri Himanshu Sharma that this Court had dismissed one writ petition on the ground of forum conveniens and the order of this Court was set aside by Division Bench of this Court by order dtd. 7/12/2023 passed in W.A.No.872/2022 and therefore, even the principle of forum convens does not apply to the facts and circumstances of the case.