( 1 ) RULE returnable forthwith. Heard by consent.

( 2 ) THE petitioners have challenged the tender process initiated by the respondent No. 1 Maharashtra State Electricity Transmission Company Limited and the award of the contract to the respondent No. 3. According to the respondent No. 1 the entire cause of action has not arisen within the normal territorial jurisdiction of the Bench at Nagpur, and same has arisen within the territorial jurisdiction of the Principal Seat at Bombay, hence a preliminary objection has been raised to the filing of this petition at Nagpur. We have accordingly heard the learned counsel on this issue.

( 3 ) SHRI K. H. Deshpande, Senior Advocate, the learned counsel for the respondent No. 1 submitted that the place of filing of a writ petition is controlled by Article 226 (2) of the Constitution of India which empowers a High Court to exercise jurisdiction in relation to the territories within which cause of action, whole or any part thereof. Further, according to learned counsel, as far as this bench of the Bombay High Court is concerned, Parliament has specially delineated the territorial jurisdiction while reorganizing the State of Mahar