Delhi High Court - Orders
Theme Engineering Services Pvt. Ltd. & ... vs Ministry Of Road Transport And Highways on 10 May, 2022
Author: Yashwant Varma
Bench: Yashwant Varma
$~56
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
+ W.P.(C) 7303/2022 & CM APPL. 22369/2022 (for stay)
THEME ENGINEERING SERVICES PVT. LTD. & ANR.
..... Petitioners
Through: Mr. Parag P. Tripathi, Sr. Adv. with
Ms. Nandadevi Deka, Mr. Savysachi
Rawat and Mr. Anirudh Dusaj, Advs.
versus
MINISTRY OF ROAD TRANSPORT AND HIGHWAYS
..... Respondent
Through: Ms. Gunjan Sinha Jain, Adv. for
MoRTH.
Mr. Aakash Meena, Adv. for UOI.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE YASHWANT VARMA
ORDER
% 10.05.2022 CM APPL. 22370/2022 (for exemption) Allowed, subject to all just exception.
The application shall stand disposed of.
W.P.(C) 7303/2022 & CM APPL. 22369/2022 (for stay) A preliminary objection is taken to the maintainability of the writ petition with learned counsel appearing for the respondent drawing the attention of the Court to the fact that the impugned order has been passed by the Superintendent Engineer attached to the office of the Chief Engineer, Ministry of Road Transport and Highways [MoRTH] in Bhopal. Learned counsel further submits that even the contract in question is being executed Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:NEHA Signing Date:11.05.2022 16:44:55 in Bhopal in the State of Madhya Pradesh.
Mr. Tripathi, learned Senior Counsel appearing in support of the petition however submits that the recitals as appearing in the impugned order would show that it has been issued with the approval of the competent authority in the MoRTH and is stationed in Delhi.
Notwithstanding the above, Court notes that the principal cause of action stems from certain wrongdoings which have come to the notice of the respondent in connection with the execution of a contract in Bhopal in the State of Madhya Pradesh. It is the competent authorities stationed in that State which have upon a review of the working of the petitioner passed the order impugned. In view of the aforesaid, the Court would lack territorial jurisdiction to try the present writ petition. Regard must be had to the fact that whenever an objection of the present nature is raised, it becomes imperative to ascertain whether any essential, material or integral part of the cause of action has arisen within the territorial jurisdiction of the Court. Tested on the aforesaid principle, it is manifest that the present petition would not meet that benchmark.
It is accordingly dismissed on the aforesaid score. This order however shall not preclude the petitioner from approaching the appropriate High Court for relief, if so chosen and advised. Though needless to state, it is further clarified that this order shall not be construed as an expression of opinion on the merits of the case of the petitioner.
YASHWANT VARMA, J.
MAY 10, 2022/SU Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:NEHA Signing Date:11.05.2022 16:44:55