Territorial jurisdiction under Article 226 bars writs where seizure and customs proceedings arose outside the forum's territory.

Territorial jurisdiction under Article 226 depends on where the material cause of action arises, and a High Court should not entertain writ petitions where the impugned seizure, show cause notice, and connected proceedings arose outside its territorial limits. Here, the consignment was seized at Delhi, the notice was issued from Delhi, and the consequential action also commenced there, so the proper forum was the court having jurisdiction over Delhi. The availability of statutory remedies under the Customs Act further supported refusal of writ intervention in the present forum. The petitions were therefore not maintainable before the Jammu and Kashmir High Court.

---

---

Issues: Whether the writ petitions were maintainable before the High Court when the seizure of goods and issuance of the show cause notice, and the connected proceedings, arose at Delhi and not within Jammu and Kashmir.

Analysis: The territorial reach of Article 226 depends on where the material action or omission giving rise to the grievance occurred. The seizure of the consignment took place at Delhi, the show cause notice was issued from Delhi, and the consequential proceedings, including the connected criminal action, were initiated there. In such circumstances, the appropriate forum was the court having territorial jurisdiction over Delhi. The availability of statutory remedies under the Customs Act also reinforced the impropriety of invoking writ jurisdiction in the present forum.

Conclusion: The High Court lacked territorial justification to entertain the writ petitions, and the challenge was not maintainable before it.

Final Conclusion: Both writ petitions failed on the ground of territorial jurisdiction, leaving the petitioners to pursue remedies before the competent forum at Delhi.

Ratio Decidendi: A writ petition under Article 226 is maintainable only before the High Court within whose territorial jurisdiction the operative cause of action arises, and where the impugned seizure and proceedings occur elsewhere, the writ court should not be invoked.

---