Shrigovind Niranjan And Others Vs State of Madhya Pradesh And Others (Madhya Pradesh High Court)
The Madhya Pradesh High Court rules on territorial jurisdiction for writ petitions, emphasizing the petitioner’s right to choose forum when concurrent jurisdiction exists and clarifying the application of forum conveniens based on where the cause of action arises.
Madhya Pradesh High Court recently addressed the issue of territorial jurisdiction for writ petitions in two appeals, Shrigovind Niranjan And Others Vs State of Madhya Pradesh And Others. The appeals, arising from separate proceedings but raising identical legal questions, challenged orders from two single-judge benches that dismissed petitions based on the principle of forum conveniens. Both single judges had redirected the petitioners to the Gwalior Bench of the High Court, asserting that it would be a more appropriate forum, despite the impugned orders originating from Bhopal, which falls under the Jabalpur Bench’s territorial jurisdiction.
The core of the dispute revolved around three key questions: whether a writ petition is maintainable where the impugned order was issued, even if it affects an individual outside that bench’s territorial jurisdiction; whether a petition can be filed solely based on the authority’s seat when the cause of action arises elsewhere; and whose convenience—the petitioner’s or the state’s—should dictate the application of forum conveniens.
