1. It is not in dispute that the petitioners are located in another State. The entire proceedings, apropos this assessment, under The Employees’ Provident Funds & Miscellaneous Provisions Act, 1952 were initiated in Faridabad (Haryana). All their records, normal activities, the school children and the teachers are in Haryana and the proceedings were conducted in that State. The only reason why the petitioners seek to exercise jurisdiction of this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution is that the impugned order was passed by the EPF Appellate Authority, which is located in Delhi.

2. This Court is of the view that this by itself would not be the singular factor for this Court to exercise the discretionary jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution. This issue is no more res-integra in view of the decision of the Court dated 01.08.2011 passed in WP(C) No. 6570/2010, titled: Sterling Agro Industries Ltd. vs Union of India & Ors., which held as under:

“..... 31. The concept of forum conveniens fundamentally means that it is obligatory on the part of the court to see the convenience of all the parties before it. The convenience in its ambit and sweep would include the