Back
Allahbad High Court
SATISHCHANDRA
The Purtabpore Co. Ltd - Appellant
Versus
Cane Commissioner, Bihar, New Secretariat Patna in the State of Bihar - Respondent
Decided On : 01/01/1968
JURISDICTION - CERTIORARI - RESERVATION OF VILLAGES FOR SUGAR FACTORY - MODIFICATION OF RESERVATION ORDER - NO JURISDICTION TO ENTERTAIN PETITION - CAUSE OF ACTION NOT ARISING WITHIN TERRITORIAL JURISDICTION - SUGAR CANE (CONTROL) ORDER, 1966, CLAUSES 6, 11.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner, Purtabpore Company Limited, sought a certiorari to quash the orders passed by the Cane Commissioner, Bihar, modifying the earlier order reserving certain villages for the petitioner's sugar factory. The petitioner claimed that the impugned orders were passed without jurisdiction and violated the decision of the Joint Sugarcane Board for Uttar Pradesh and Bihar.
Finding of the Court:
The court held that it had no jurisdiction to entertain the petition as no part of the cause of action arose within the territorial jurisdiction of the court. The court found that the impugned orders were passed by the Cane Commissioner, Bihar, who was located outside the court's jurisdiction, and that the subject matter of the orders, the reserved villages, were also located outside the court's jurisdiction.
Issues: 1. Whether the court had jurisdiction to entertain the petition for certiorari. 2. Whether the impugned orders were passed without jurisdiction. 3. Whether the impugned orders violated the decision of the Joint Sugarcane Board for Uttar Pradesh and Bihar.
Ratio Decidendi: 1. The court held that it had no jurisdiction to entertain the petition as no part of the cause of action arose within the territorial jurisdiction of the court. The court relied on Article 226(1-A) of the Constitution, which provides that a High Court may exercise its power to issue writs only in relation to territories within which the cause of action, wholly or in part, arises. 2. The court held that the impugned orders were not passed without jurisdiction as the Cane Commissioner, Bihar, had the authority to pass such orders under the Sugarcane (Control) Order, 1966. 3. The court held that the impugned orders did not violate the decision of the Joint Sugarcane Board for Uttar Pradesh and Bihar as such decision was not legally enforceable.
Final Decision: The court dismissed the petition on the preliminary ground that it had no jurisdiction to entertain it. The petitioner was ordered to pay costs to the respondents.
2. In exercise of the powers conferred by section 3 of the Essential Commodities Act, 1955, the Central Government on 16th July, 1966, passed the Sugarcane (Control) Order, 1966. Clause 6(1)(a) of this Order entitled the Central Government to make an order reserving any area where sugarcane is grown for a factory. Under clause 11 the Central Government could delegate all or any of the powers conferred upon it on, inter alia, the State Government or any officer or authority of the State Government. The same day, that is 16th July, 1966, the Central Government delegated the powers conferred on it by clauses 6, 7, 8 and 9 of the Order on, inter alia, the State Governments of Bihar and Uttar Pradesh as well as on the Cane Commissioners of Bihar and Uttar Pradesh. Utilising this delegated power, the Cane Commissioner, Bihar, on 30th December, 1966, made an order (No. 3088) directing that the villages named in the list shall constitute the reserved area of Purtabpore Sugar Factory Limited. Mairwa, for the purposes of sugarcane during the seasons 1966-67 and 1967-68. The list included 208 villages. All these villages were situate in the district of Saran in the State of Bihar. Feeling aggrieved the Standard Refinery and Distillery Limited, respondent no. 9, questioned the validity of this reservation order by instituting a writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution before the High Court at Patna C. W. J. C No 63 of 1967. The petitioner contested it During its pendency, respondent no. 9. made representations to various authorities for re-opening the question of reservation of 208 villages in favour of the petitioner. Coming to know of these moves, the petitioner Company made representations to the Government of Bihar and the Cane Commissioner and further prayed that the said 208 villages should continue to be reserved in favour of the petitioner on a long term basis. The Cane Commissioner, Bihar, passed two orders on 14th November, 1967. By one order (No. 2332) the Cane Commissioner superseded his earlier order no. 3088 dated 30th December, 1966, and further directed that the villages named in the list below shall constitute the reserved area for the petitioner factory for purchase of sugarcane during the season 1967-68. The list mentioned only 109 out of the 208 villages. A copy of this order was forwarded to M/s. Purtabpore Sugar Factory Limited, Mairwa, the petitioner. This order had the effect of cancelling the earlier reservation order of 208 villages completely for the year 1968-69. It confined the reservation for the year 1967-68 to only 109 villages. By another order the Cane Commissioner directed that the remaining 99 villages shall constitute the reserved area of respondent no. 9 for purposes of sugarcane during the season 1967-68. This order was forwarded to respondent no. 9. The petitioner wants both these orders to be quashed.
3. The same day, that is on 14th November, 1967, respondent no. 9 applied for withdrawal of the writ petition filed by it before the High Court at Patna. The petitioner Company contested that application but the prayer was granted. The same day the present writ petition was instituted in this Court.
4. At the hearing Mr. Khare, appearing for respondent no. 9, as well as Mr. Gopi Nath, appearing for the Cane Commissioner, Bihar, raised a preliminary objection to the competence of the writ petition. They urged that no part of the cause of action had accrued within the territorial jurisdiction of this High Court and so this Court had no jurisdiction to entertain this writ petition. Under
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
