9911796707
TMI Blog2015 (12) TMI 1212X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Bombay High Court and not this High Court. Had the petitioner availed of the remedy of appeal, instead of invoking the provisions of Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the dispute would have travelled to the Bombay High Court and not this High Court. The Bombay High Court being the jurisdictional High Court insofar as the adjudicating authority, the lower appellate authority, as well as the Tribunal in relation to matters arising from the Union Territory of Dadra and Nagar Haveli, it is the decisions of that High Court which are binding on those authorities. Under the circumstances, it is the Bombay High Court before which the action can be most appropriately brought - Decided against Appellant. - Special Civil Application No. 1251 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the Tribunal lies to the Bombay High Court, it is the said High Court which has the territorial jurisdiction to entertain such petition and not this High Court. It was submitted that no cause of action has arisen within the territorial jurisdiction of this High Court and that the situs of the authority that passed the order would not determine the territorial jurisdiction of the court. 2.1 In support of his submissions, the learned counsel placed reliance upon the decision of the Supreme Court in the case of Ambica Industries v. Commissioner of Central Excise, 2007 (213) ELT 323 (SC), wherein the court in the context of maintainability of an appeal under section 35G of the Act, had held that determination of the jurisdiction of a High Co ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... el placed strong reliance upon the decision of the Supreme Court in the case of Kusum Ingots Alloys Ltd. v. Union of India, 2004 (168) ELT 3 (SC), wherein it has been held that when an order is passed by a Court or Tribunal or an executive authority whether under provisions of a statute or otherwise, a part of the cause of action arises at that place. Even in a given case, when the original authority is constituted at one place and the appellate authority is constituted at another, a writ petition would be maintainable at both the places. In other words, as the order of the appellate authority constitutes a part of cause of action, a writ petition would be maintainable in the High Court within whose jurisdiction it is situate having regar ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... es set out by the Supreme Court in a catena of decisions wherein the bar of alternative remedy will not operate in invoking the writ jurisdiction of this court. In support of his submissions, the learned counsel placed reliance upon the decision of the Supreme Court in the case of Metal Forgings v. Union of India, (2002) 146 ELT 241 (SC) . Reliance was also placed upon the decision of the Supreme Court in the case of Commissioner of Central Excise, Nagpur v. Ballarpur Industries Ltd., (2007) 215 ELT 489 (SC) as well as the decision of the Supreme Court in the case of Commissioner of Customs, Mumbai v. Toyo Engineering India Limited, (2006) 201 ELT 513 (SC), for the proposition that when the grounds did not find mention in the show cause not ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ia (supra), the Supreme Court has held that when an order is passed by a Court or Tribunal or an executive authority whether under the provisions of a statute or otherwise, a part of the cause of action arises at that place. Even in a given case, when the original authority is constituted at one place and the appellate authority is constituted at another, a writ petition would be maintainable at both the places. In other words, as the order of the appellate authority constitutes a part of cause of action, a writ petition would be maintainable in the High Court within whose jurisdiction it is situate having regard to the fact that the order of the appellate authority is also required to be set aside and as the order of the original authority ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... investigation has been carried out at Vapi would not be a determinative factor for compelling this court to decide the matter on merits. As noted earlier, against the order passed by the adjudicating authority, appeal lies to the Tribunal and against the order of the Tribunal, appeal lies to the Bombay High Court. Therefore, the statutory forum to adjudicate the dispute raised in the petition at the level of the High Court is the Bombay High Court and not this High Court. Had the petitioner availed of the remedy of appeal, instead of invoking the provisions of Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the dispute would have travelled to the Bombay High Court and not this High Court. The Bombay High Court being the jurisdictional High Court ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
