LUCKY COKE MANUFACTURERS Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE writ petition has been filed, inter alia, challenging the impugned decision of Chief General Manager (S and M/QC) of BCCL rejecting the prayer of the petitioner to execute fuel supply agreement as prayed for.

(2.) AT the outset Mr. Mondal, learned advocate for the respondent no.4 submits that the writ petition is not maintainable due to lack of territorial jurisdiction. He further submits that the issue of lack of territoriality was kept open at the time of admission. In support of such plea, Mr. Mondal submitted that admittedly the office of the authority who took the impugned decision and all records thereto is situated at Dhanbad in the State of Jharkhand and the impugned decision was also taken therein. He further submitted that the primary relief sought for is to set aside the said decision and hence, no part of the cause of action in respect of the writ petition arose within the territorial jurisdiction of this Court.

(3.) MR . Patwari, learned advocate for the petitioners submitted that the petitioner no.1 is carrying on business at Purulia within the jurisdiction of this Court. He further submitted that the coal supplied under the proposed agreement was to be utilized at Purulia. Accordingly, he submitted that a part of cause of action in respect of the impugned refusal to supply arose within the territorial jurisdiction of this Court.