JUDGMENT

Sanjeev Sachdeva, J.:-- (Oral)

1. The hearing was conducted through video conferencing.

2. Petitioner impugns letter dated 02.02.2021 issued by the Senior Divisional Commercial Manager, Danapur, Patna.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that since the appointing authority of the Senior Divisional Commercial Manager is the Railway Board and Railway Board is situated in Delhi, this Court would have the territorial jurisdiction to entertain the petition.

4. He further submits that in similar circumstances the Supreme Court of India has entertained several writ petitions and passed orders granting benefit to various license holders across the country.

5. I am unable to accept the contention of learned counsel for the petitioner in as much as merely because the Railway Board which is the appointing authority of the officer who has passed the impugned order is situated in Delhi would not confer jurisdiction on this Court especially when neither the authority whose order is impugned is situated in Delhi nor any part of cause of action has arisen in Delhi.

6. The factum of Supreme Court entertaining Writ Petitions of several vendors situated across the country would also not c