Maintainability of the petitions under Article 226 before the High Court  

In a judgment of five Judges of Delhi High Court in Sterling Agro Industries v. Union of India 2011 (124) DRJ 633,  the decision of the Full Bench in New India Assurance Company Limited v. Union of India AIR 2010 Del 43 (FB)  was affirmed, wherein it was held that “as the appellate authority is situated in New Delhi, the Delhi High Court has the jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India and, therefore, there was no occasion for the learned Single  Judge  to  apply  the  principle  of  forum  non  convenience  to  refuse exercise of jurisdiction. It was further held that even if a minuscule part of cause of action arises within the jurisdiction of a particular court, a writ petition would be maintainable before that Court, however, the cause of action has to be understood as per the ratio laid down in the case of Alchemist Ltd. v. State Bank of Sikkim (2007) 11 SCC 335.

It was further held that an order of the appellate authority constitutes a part of a cause of action to make the writ petition maintainable in the High Court within whose jurisdiction the appellate authority is situated.

However, the High Court may refuse to exercise its discretionary jurisdiction by invoking the doctrine of forum convenient.

Vijay Pal Dalmia, Advocate
Supreme Court of India & Delhi High Court
Mobile: +919810081079 
Connect With Us Social Media