LAWS(GAU)-1993-11-3

UNION OF INDIA Vs. RAM KUMAR AGARWALA

Decided On November 19, 1993
UNION OF INDIA Appellant
V/S
RAM KR. AGARWALA Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Writ Appeals No. 62 of 1993 and 92 of 1993 are from a common judgment of a learned single Judge passed on 5.1.93 in Civil Rule No. 1628 and 1629 of 1992. They were heard together and are disposed of by a common judgment. Sri Ram Kumar Agarwala is writ petitioner in Civil Rule No. 1628 of 1992 ; M/s. Subhrajit Buragohain, in Civil Rule No. 1629 of 1992.

(2.) Facts leading to these appeals, in brief, are as follows. The Deputy Secretary to the Government of Assam Food and Civil Supplies Department, under his letter dated 10.1.92, forwarded the names of the State Government's nominees for the movement of zonal (iodized) salt to Assam during first quarter of 1992 and requested the Salt Commissioner and the Railway Board for approval of the programme and to give instructions to the concerned railway for acceptance of the indents for wagons from the Government nominees. The Sponsorship was approved by the Salt Commissioner. The Writ Petitioners were two of the nominees of the State Government for movement of the salt from Maliya Miyana of Gujarat to Tezpur and Jorhat in Assam. The petitioners appointed a common agent, namely M/s. ABC Enterprise of Gandhidham of Gujarat. At Maliya Miyana Railway Station, indents for wagons were registered on 4.3.92 for the petitioner in Civil Rule No. 1628 of 1992 and on 18.3.92 for the petitioner in Civil Rule No. 1629 of 1992. The railway authority prepared oldest date of registration ("ODR" for short) for the entire division on the basis of the registration of indents for supply of rakes in accordance with the serial order. In the ODR, the names of the petitioners, Ram Kumar Agarwala and M/s. Subhrajit Buragohain, appeared at serial Nos. 9 and 21 respectively. On 12.6.92 wagons were supplied to the persons at the first and second of the rank in the ODR, and the petitioners ware allotted rakes on 13.6.92. As the agent for the petitioners was not ready to load the wagons with salt, the agent withdrew rakes. Thereafter, the Under Secretary to the Government of Assam, Food and Civil Supplies Department, wrote a letter dated 18.6.92 to the Director (TT), Ministry of Railways, requesting him to look into the matter and ensure review of the indents placed by the agent of the petitioners. The Assistant Salt Commissioner at Gandhidham, under his communication dated 26.6.92, forwarded a letter dated 23.6.92 of the common agent of the petitioners for revalidation of the indents of the rakes withdrawn by him at Maliya Miyama Railway Station, to the Salt Commissioner for his appropriate action. The Under Secretary to the Government of Assam also wrote another letter dated 18.7.92 to the Director (TT) to allow the petitioners to place fresh indents so that salt may be moved to its destinations. No action was taken by the railway authorities for registration for wagons. Therefore, the petitioners filed the two writ petitions praying this Court to direct the respondents - 1 to 4 to allow the petitioners to place fresh indents for registration of wagons. The learned single Judge allowed the petitions. Being aggrieved by the judgment and order of the learned single Judge, Union Government has filed these appeals.

(3.) Mr. B.K. Sharma, learned counsel for the appellants, has contended that this Court has no territorial jurisdiction to entertain the writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, for the reason that they cause of action wholly arose within territorial jurisdiction of the Gujarat High Court and no part of cause of action arose in Assam, arose in Assam, and the location or seat of the authority to whom direction is to be issued is outside the territorial jurisdiction of this Court.