Territorial jurisdiction in writ petitions turns on the location of the impugned authority and cause of action, not the bank account's situs.

Territorial jurisdiction under writ law depends on the location of the impugned authority and the material cause of action, not merely on the situs of a bank account. An attachment issued under the Income-tax Act by an assessing authority located in Tamil Nadu could not be challenged before the Kerala High Court only because the assessee maintained an account in Kerala. As the relevant orders and business connection were in Tamil Nadu, the writ petition was held not maintainable in Kerala for want of territorial jurisdiction.

---

---

Issues: Whether the writ petition challenging attachment of a bank account was maintainable before the High Court when the assessing authority whose order led to the attachment was situated outside the Court's territorial jurisdiction.

Analysis: The challenge was to an attachment arising from the exercise of power by the assessing authority under the Income-tax Act. The authority was located in Tamil Nadu, and the fact that the petitioner maintained a bank account within Kerala did not confer territorial jurisdiction on the Kerala High Court. The relevant orders were connected with business carried on in Tamil Nadu, and the settled jurisdictional principle barred invocation of writ jurisdiction in Kerala on that basis alone.

Conclusion: The writ petition was not maintainable before the Kerala High Court for want of territorial jurisdiction, and the dismissal of the writ petition was upheld.

---