2023 Supreme(Bom) 802
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT NAGPUR
A.S. Chandurkar, M.W. Chandwani, JJ.
Kohli Roadlines, Nagpur – Appellant
Versus
Maharashtra State Power Generation Company Limited, Mumbai – Respondent
Writ Petition No. 1577 of 2021
Decided On : 16-03-2023
S.P. Dharmadhikari, Advocate, A.N. Kawale, Advocate, M.P. Khajanchi, Advocate, A.A. Naik, Advocate
Territorial jurisdiction is crucial in determining the court's authority to entertain a petition, and the absence of cause of action within the territorial limits can lead to the dismissal of the petition.
Headnote:
Tender - Territorial Jurisdiction - No Acts and Sections referenced
Fact of the Case:
The writ petition challenges a tender floated by the respondent for the transportation of Raw Coal against Road-cum-Rail (RCR) Allocation. The respondent raised a preliminary objection on the territorial jurisdiction of the court to entertain the writ petition.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that no part of the cause of action arose within the territorial limits of the Nagpur Bench, and therefore, the writ petition was not entertained on merits.
Issues: The main issue was whether the court had territorial jurisdiction to entertain the writ petition challenging the tender process.
Ratio Decidendi: The court emphasized the importance of pleading facts to indicate the manner in which cause of action arises and held that absence of such pleadings precludes the petitioner from seeking consideration of its contention that a part of cause of action has arisen at Nagpur.
Final Decision: The court declined to entertain the writ petition for absence of cause of action or even part thereof arising at the Nagpur Bench of the High Court and disposed of the petition. The petitioner was given the option to approach the Court having territorial jurisdiction to raise the grievances.
JUDGMENT
1. The challenge raised in this writ petition is to the tender floated by the respondent in the matter of transportation of Raw Coal transportation against Road-cum-Rail (RCR) Allocation from Kusmunda/Gevra/Dipka mines of South East Coalfield Limited (SECL) to the Thermal Power Stations of the respondent.
2. A preliminary objection is raised by the learned counsel for the respondent that this Court lacks territorial jurisdiction to entertain the writ petition since no part of the cause of action has arisen within the territorial limits of the Nagpur Bench of this Court. Accordingly, the learned counsel for the parties have been heard on the aforesaid preliminary objection.
3. A brief reference to the E-Tender document is necessary. The aforesaid E-Tender notice is dated 11.01.2023 and the work proposed is Raw Coal transportation against Road-cum-Rail (RCR) Allocation from Kusmunda/Gevra/ Dipka mines of South East Coalfield Limited to the Thermal Power Stations of the respondent. The registration, sale of tender document as well as submission of the same is required to be done online and the pre-bid meeting is to be held at the Office of the respondent at Prakashgarh, Bandra (East), Mumbai. In effect, the E-Tender document has been published from the Head Office of the respondent at Mumbai and the submission of the bids is also to be done online at the said Head Office.
4. Shri M.P. Khajanchi, learned counsel for the respondent in support of the preliminary objection submits that the entire tender process is to be conducted online and consideration of all the bids received is to be undertaken at the Head Office at Mumbai. The evaluation as well as the process of reverse bidding which is also to be conducted online is through the Head Office at Mumbai. The mere reason that transportation of coal to various Thermal Power Stations including those situated within the territorial jurisdiction of this Bench cannot result in giving rise to any cause of action to the petitioner to challenge the tender document on the grounds pleaded in the writ petition. Mere fact that the Office of the petitioner is situated at Nagpur is not sufficient to enable the writ petition to be filed at Nagpur for being entertained on merits. In support of his submissions the learned counsel has relied upon the judgment of this Court in Writ Petition No. 5444 of 2021 [Balaji Ventures Pvt. Ltd. Versus Maharashtra State Power Generation Company Ltd. & Another] decided on 24.01.2022 as well as the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Petition(s) for Special Leave to Appeal (C) Nos.1616 of 2022 and 1673 of 2022 that were filed for challenging the judgment of this Court dated 24.01.2022. Mere submission of online tender documents from Nagpur would thus not confer any territorial jurisdiction for the petitioner to invoke the writ jurisdiction at this Bench. It is thus submitted that since no part of cause of action arises at Nagpur, the writ petition need not deserve to be entertained on merits at this Bench.
5. Shri S.P. Dharmadhikari, learned Senior Advocate for the petitioner opposed the aforesaid submissions and submitted that even if a part of cause of action is shown to have arisen within the territorial limits of the Nagpur Bench, the writ petition ought to be entertained on merits. Reference was made to various clauses of the E-Tender document and especially Clauses 1.1, 1.2, 1.14, 1.17, 1.27, 1.35 as well as Schedule-IV of the bid document to urge that notwithstanding the fact that the bids were to be submitted online, the petitioner had downloaded the E-Tender document at Nagpur and it had submitted the same from Nagpur resulting in part of cause of action arising at Nagpur. Merely because the bid document was to be submitted online to the Head Office of the respondent at Mumbai would not result in ousting the territorial jurisdiction of this Bench especially in the light of the fact that the transportation of Raw Coal was to be made to various The