https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=305274 Territorial jurisdiction under Article 226 may exist in more than one High Court where part of the cause of action arises within its territory, but the court may still decline to entertain the writ if another forum is clearly more convenient. In a challenge arising from grant of a prospecting licence under the Mines and Minerals regime, the principal decision was taken by the State Government and the mine was outside Delhi, so the mere location of the revisional authority in Delhi was not decisive. Applying forum conveniens, the Delhi High Court declined to exercise jurisdiction and treated the Bombay High Court as the more appropriate forum. en-us Tue, 26 Nov 2013 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 25 Nov 2022 15:38:03 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=305274 Territorial jurisdiction under Article 226 may exist in more than one High Court where part of the cause of action arises within its territory, but the court may still decline to entertain the writ if another forum is clearly more convenient. In a challenge arising from grant of a prospecting licence under the Mines and Minerals regime, the principal decision was taken by the State Government and the mine was outside Delhi, so the mere location of the revisional authority in Delhi was not decisive. Applying forum conveniens, the Delhi High Court declined to exercise jurisdiction and treated the Bombay High Court as the more appropriate forum. Case-Laws Indian Laws Tue, 26 Nov 2013 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=305274