High Court Of Calcutta
Paritosh Kumar Mukherjee, Altamas Kabir
BHARAT COKING COAL LIMITED - Appellant
Versus
JHARIA TALKIES AND COLD STORAGE PRIVATE LTD - Respondent
C. A. J. 615 Of 1991
Decided On : 02/21/1992
JURISDICTION - WRIT PETITION - MAINTAINABILITY - TERRITORIAL JURISDICTION - PUBLIC LAND ENCROACHMENT ACT, 1956 - INTERPRETATION - JURISDICTION OF HIGH COURT UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION - CAUSE OF ACTION ARISING PARTLY WITHIN JURISDICTION - WRIT PETITION MAINTAINABLE DESPITE NO PART OF CAUSE OF ACTION ARISING WITHIN JURISDICTION IF PRINCIPAL RESPONDENT SUBJECT TO TERRITORIAL JURISDICTION OF COURT - JUDICIAL PROPRIETY DICTATES MOVING APPROPRIATE FORUM WHERE VITAL ISSUE ALREADY DECIDED BY ANOTHER HIGH COURT.
Fact of the Case:
Writ petition challenging order of Collector, Dhanbad, in a proceeding under the Bihar Public Land Encroachment Act, 1956 (1956 Act). Appellant, Bharat Coking Coal Ltd. (BCCL), added as party to proceeding and directed to take possession of building from writ petitioner. Writ petition filed in Calcutta High Court, alleging that BCCL, a subsidiary of Coal India Ltd. with office in Calcutta, issued notification claiming property as its own. BCCL contended writ petition not maintainable as no part of cause of action arose within West Bengal and order impugned passed by Collector, Dhanbad.
Finding of the Court:
Calcutta High Court held it had jurisdiction to entertain writ petition under Article 226(1) of the Constitution, as BCCL had office within its jurisdiction, even though no part of cause of action arose within West Bengal. However, considering judicial propriety and findings of Patna High Court in earlier appeal involving same property, writ petition dismissed with liberty to writ petitioner to move Patna High Court.
Issues: 1. Whether Calcutta High Court had jurisdiction to entertain writ petition challenging order of Collector, Dhanbad, under 1956 Act, where no part of cause of action arose within West Bengal? 2. Whether judicial propriety dictated that writ petitioner should have moved Patna High Court, which had earlier dealt with matter involving same property?
Ratio Decidendi: 1. Under Article 226(1) of the Constitution, High Court has jurisdiction to issue writs to any government, authority, or person if cause of action, wholly or in part, arises within territories over which it exercises jurisdiction. 2. High Court's jurisdiction under Article 226(1) is not limited to cases where cause of action arises within its territorial jurisdiction, but also extends to cases where principal respondent is subject to its territorial jurisdiction. 3. Judicial propriety may require writ petitioner to move appropriate forum where vital issue already decided by another High Court, even if High Court has jurisdiction under Article 226(1).
Final Decision: Writ petition dismissed with liberty to writ petitioner to move Patna High Court. Parties directed to maintain status quo in respect of possession of Cinema Hall for one month to enable writ petitioner to move appropriate forum.
( 1 ) THIS appeal is directed against the order dated 8th February, 1991, passed by a learned Single Judge of this Court disposing of the writ petition filed by M/s. Jharia Talkies and Cold Storage Private Ltd. and another, in which an order passed by the Collector, Dhanbad, in a proceeding, under the Bihar Public Land Encroachment Act, 1956, hereinafter referred to as the "1956 Act" for short, had been challenged.
( 2 ) BY judgment dated February 8, 1991, N. K. Mitra, J. directed delivery of possession of the disputed land to the writ petitioner within two weeks from the date of communication of the order.
( 3 ) THE present appeal was preferred on March 4, 1991, and the matter was moved before the learned Chief Justice and no steps were taken by the appellant herein to obtain stay order till actual delivery of possession back to the writ petitioner was effected in terms of the judgment.
( 4 ) ORDER of assignment was made by the learned Chief Justice on September 10, 1991, and the appeal was heard on September 17, 1991, September 24, 1991, September 25, 1991, and on September 27, 1991, when hearing was concluded, and judgment was reserved.
( 5 ) AT the very outset, it was submitted on behalf of the appellant that the writ petition itself was not maintainable as this Hon'ble Court had no territorial jurisdiction to entertain the same, since the order impugned in the writ petition is "an order", passed by the Collector, Dhanbad, Bihar, in a proceeding under the 1956 Act. Accordingly, the said submission requires to be considered first before we proceed to the merits of the appeal.
( 6 ) FOR the said purpose, it is necessary for us to set out the facts, leading to the filing of the writ petition.
( 7 ) THE writ petitioner/respondent is a Company, incorporated under the Companies Act, 1956, and is the owner of Bihar Talkies. In 1948, the sons of Raja Shib Prasad Singh sold their leasehold rights over the lands in question to the Selected Jharia Colliery Company Limited. In 1950, out of the said leasehold lands, the said company let out 3. 65 bighas of land to Jharia Talkies and Cold Storage Private Limited, the writ petitioner/ respondent herein. Thereafter, the writ petitioner/respondent obtained permission from the State of Bihar to construct "a public hall", in the leasehold premises and such permission was duly granted by the State of Bihar by its letter dated 29th November, 1950. Pursuant to the grant of such permission, the cinema hall, namely, Jharia Talkies, was constructed and licence was granted by the concerned authorities, to exhibit cinema shows, in the said cinema hall.
( 8 ) IT appears that after the vesting of estates, consequent upon the enactment of the Bihar Land Reforms Act, 1947, the State of Bihar, filed a suit, being Title Suit No, 11 of 1961, against the company for khas possession of the lease hold lands and the same was decreed in favour of the State of Bihar. An appeal was preferred against the said decree being F. A. No. 302 of 1963, by the writ petitioner/respondent herein.
( 9 ) DURING the pendency of the appeal, a proceeding was commenced by the State of Bihar under the 1956 Act being BPLE Case No. 42 of 1973-74, against the writ petitioner/respondent in 1973, alleging encroachment on certain portions of Plot No. 1013 of mouza - Jharia.
( 10 ) BEFORE the said BPLE Case No. 42 of 1973-74 could be decided, the above-mentioned appeal, being F. A. No. 302 of 1963, came up for decision before the Patna High Court. During the hearing of the appeal, it was brought to the notice of the Patna High Court that with the enactment of the Coking Coal Mines (Nationalisation) Act, 1972, the right, title and interest in the lands, in question vested in Bharat Coking Coal Ltd. , by virtue of a notification published by the Central Government. Accordingly, the Patna High Court, while disposing of the appeal, observed as follows: -"during the pendency of this appeal another legislation was passed b
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.